test. >> rose: welcome to the program. we begin this evening with a conversation about the ted talks. it is a story that i did for "60 minutes" on sunday night. >> i have never heard of ted. and i didn't know what a ted talk was. >> we continue this evening with jon ca krauer his new book about rape is called missoula, rape and the justice system in a college town. >> i scrib about one victim being sexually assaulted as a teenager turned her into a sort of ghost. ed rapist robbed her innocence, turned her into this ghost who was forever trapped in the act of being violated for a decade. i mean that is sort of what it does. you know, to be penetrated by another person in your most private places is a different kind of trauma. it's hard to imagine you yourself have not been sexually assaulted. and you know the rate of ptsd in rape vk tims is

higher than the rates of ptsd than soldiers and marines returning from combat in of afghanistan and iraq. >> we condition include with the star of the good wife julianna margulies. >> its with a very clever way that robert and mush el managed to, i think make politics for women especially running interesting. and yet not have her be-- the truth is, when i asked if she was going to win, they said from the beginning no. because the show is more interesting to write when you're in the law firm. being states's attorney means you're constantly prosecuting criminals rather than being with them. >> the ted talks college rape and "the good wife" coming up. funding for charlie rose is provided by the following: >> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by: >> rose: additional funding provided by:

>> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> brian stevenson was exactly the sort of person that people at ted wanted. he was an attorney spent years trying to reform the criminal justice system. they thought he would have a lot to say. he said yes. then he remembered a serious conflict on his clal ender. >> it was scheduled two weeks before i had an argument at the u.s. supreme court. and i told one of my young staffers, somebody named ted wanted me to come and do a ted talk. and i told him know and my staff said crazy, what are you talking about, you have to do a ted talk. >> what did she say to convince you. >> this is really a big deal am it is an incredible

platform. everybody watches ted talks. >> being here at ted and seeing the simulation-- . >> rose: in march 2012 brian stevenson took the stage at the annual ted conference in long beach california. he was one of more than 60 speakers that week. >> we have a system of justice in this country that treats you much better if you are rich and guilty than if you are poor and innocent. wealth culpability shapes outcome. >> rose: he made the case for changing the criminal justice system with the same mixture of passion and logic that he uses to persuade judges and juries. he introduced his equal justice initiative in a disarmingly personal way. >> i had the great privilege when i was a young lawyer meeting rosa parks. and she turned to me and said brian, tell me what the equal justice initiative is. tell me what you are trying it do. i began giving her my rap. i said we're trying to challenge in justice, we're trying to help people who

have been wrongly convicted. we're tring to confront bias and-- bias and discrimination we're trying to end life without parole for children, trying to do something about the death penalty. trying to reduce the prison population. try tonged mass incarceration, when i finished she looked at me and she said hmmmm hmmmm hmmmm. she said that's going to make you tired tired tired. >> and with that he had them. i simply have come to tell you that to keep your eyes on the prize. hold on. thank you very much. >> when you ended it did you think you had done a good job. >> people were very enthusiastic and responded in a really wonderful way. >> it's what we call a standing o vations. >> yes, yes. >> the crowd also offered financial support which was unprecedented since ted talks are to the about raising money. >> some people came up to me and said you know we think that what you are doing is really quite extraordinary. a lot of people in this room want to support you. and i had to leave. >> you had another engagement in seattle. >> i did.

i said well, i can't stayment an much to my amazement, we raised a million dollars. >> rose: a million dollars. >> a million dollars. >> rose: and this is happening without you there. >> without me there yeah, exactly. >> rose: and what difference did raising a million dollars at an event that you knew nothing about make for the cause that you are devoted your life to. >> hundreds and hundreds of people were now going to have a chance to get fairer sentences. >> rose: and it didn't end at the speech because you have this thing called the internet. >> yes that's exactly right. even now i get lots and lots of people responding to the ted talk. >> you are an inspiring person. >> the person without put brian stevenson on the stage was chris anderson, the man who runs ted. he chooses his speakers. he hosts ted conferences. and he decides which talks go on-line. >> there are numerous brilliant people out there. and they have come up with something really important. and so part of the way we see our role is to help them make their knowledge accessible. >> it's the camp fire n part. >> it is a camp fire.

someone stands up everyone's eyes are upon them. they tell a story. >> rose: the story of ted began with a small conference in the 1980s. >> it can record one hour. >> rose: where bold new ideas were presented about technology entertainment and design. ted for short. >> visual technology. >> we have had so many people. >> anderson was a successful magazine publisher. he attended his first ted conference in 1998 and tell in love with what he heard there. and so he bought ted. and turned it too a nonprofit organization. >> in 2006 as something of an experiment, he put a handful of conference talks on-line. the reaction was almost immediate. >> we started to get e-mails that said things like i'm sitting at my computer screen crying. >> rose: an emotional -- >> a passionate conection. like these talks had got inside people's heads and changed them. >> so this is a real human

brain. >> rose: one of the earliest ted talks posted was literally about what was going inside the head of neurobiologist jill bolt taylor. >> and i realized oh my gosh, i'm having a stroke i'm hafing a stroke. the next thing my brain says to me is wow this is so cool. (laughter) >> this is so cool. how many brains-- have had the opportunity to study their own brain from the inside out. >> taylor's talk went viral. >> we need mathmaticians. >> and soon internet users couldn't get enough of ted talks. >> every child-- . >> rose: a million views turned into a billion. >> what? >> rose: and now it is an internet phenomenon. >> there are all sorts of ted conferences being held around the world daily. >> i've been locked up now going on 17 years. >> rose: ted started its own web site ted.com. it has 2,000 talks on just about every subject

imaginable. >> i can tell you with great confidence i've been to the future. >> i'm 17 years old and i am a nuclear physicist. >> rose: it is something of an intellectual variety show and it is free. >> thank you. >> i was patient zero. >> rose: it was front page news when monica lewinsky recently gave a ted talk on cyberbullying. how does chris anderson decide who gets the opportunity? >> there's no formula or algorithm that says what is right. it's basically a judgement call as to what is interesting and what is interesting now. >> countless men around the world-- . >> rose: anderson and his team spend much of their time auditioning. >> it's become a common complaint complaint. >> rose: and looking for the next great story. >> for the past two years i've spent thousands of hours working with invasive breast cancer cells in the lab. >> rose: a great ted talk demands careful planning. most speakers get months of preparation and coaching. >> changing-- the core question may make the rest

of the talk land a bit more clearly. >> rose: there are a few rules there is no selling a product or a book from the stage. no pseudoscience is allowed. and there's an 18 minute time limit. >> why 18 minutes? >> it's a natural humana tension span. it's extended coffee break. you can listen to something serious that long without et going bored or exhausted. >> rose: the goal is to make it to a ted conference and then get your talk posted on-line. speakers do not get paid yet people line up for the chance to make a ted talk. >> they hope to be the next amy cuddy. >> we are really fascinated with body language. >> rose: she was a largely unknown psychology professor at harvard until she took the ted stage in 2012. >> so what if your body language communicated to me was's mine communicating to you. >> cuddy's talk was about her research into nonverbal communication. but it was her personal story that captured the

imagination of the audience. >> when i was 19 i was in a really bad car accident. i was thrown out of a car. and i woke up in a head injury rehab ward. and i learned that my iq had dropped by two standard deviations. >> rose: shing aonized about revealing she had suffered a traumatic brain injury in that car accident. >> i felt deep-- and also what have i ambivalence. >> yes, have i changed pie life in a way that i-- that i will regret. will people be judging me. will my colleagues think i'm stupid. the head injury story was really, really personal and it was something that i had mostly kept locked away. >> rose: this is the most watched ted talk in the last two years. >> that's what chris tells me yes. >> rose: according to chris anderson she's had more than 23 million views. it has turned amy cuddy into a star in this new ted

created universe. she's hot on the lecture circuit and has a new book coming out. chris anderson and ted can make someone's career. >> do you like the power that it gives you? >> i don't think in terms of power. >> rose: it does give you power. you can sit there and change somebody's life by putting-- make them a ted speaker. >> you make those choices. then you have power. >> well, i'm afraid it is more responsible but a joyful one. i do love the fact that someone can give a talk and a few months later can be known by millions of people around the world. >> rose: but for may soon the fame she received was not the fame she was looking for. >> i got 99 problems and passsy is just one. >> rose: she is a comedian and when she appeared on the ted stage a year and a half ago, she had a punch line. >> i'm palestinian muslim i'm female i'm disabled and i live in new jersey.

>> rose: and she had a serious point. >> people with disabilities are the largest minority in the world and we are the most underrepresented in entertainment. >> rose: she also had an agenda. >> i actually thought that once the talk was done my career would skyrocket. i want to be on tv and i thought that the ted talk would open the door for more real-life opportunities with me. >> rose: and that's what ted did not do. >> that is what ted didn't do. but what it did do was it amp find my voice worldwide. >> rose: with more than 6 million fews-- views of her talk which was translated into several languages she believes she succeeded in a different way. >> i didn't expect to hear from so many people that felt the talk was about them. >> rose: how did you change the lives of people who were disabled? >> i think the change occurs mostly on an individual basis. what i think i have done is

help people go out there and say, i have a disability. i shake all the time. it's totally fine. you need to treat me as an equal even if physically i'm different than you. and i think what you've done is really empower people to be proud of who they are. a lot of people with cp don't walk. >> rose: critics of ted and there are some, believe that this emphasis on the personal stories has turned ted talks into infotainment offering easy answers to serious problems. but don't count brian stevenson among the skeptics. he traces part of the current public debate about reforming the criminal justice system back to the ted talk he gave in 2012. and while he is grateful for the money that ted raised he's even more appreciative of the platform. >> did your experience at ted change you in any way? >> well, it did. it made me more helpful about what can be achieved if you change the narrative. >> rose: is there something

about ted you want to change? >> i think the challenge is getting at people who consume all of this wonderful stuff that ted provides. so not just be consumers, but to take what they learn and know and hear and turn it into some kind of action that maybe a little uncomfortable. that maybe a little inconvenient but will absolutely be transform difficult to making these great ideas. really ideas that not only spread but create a greater world. >> rose: jon ca krauer is here, a writer and a journalist. he is known for best-sellers like into the wild and into thin air. his latest book takes a look at a series of sexual assaults at the university of montana. it is called missoula, rape and the justice system in a college of town. the department of juses tuses estimates 80% of rapes against college women are unreported making it the least reported felony in america. welcome. >> thank you very much. >> rose: listen to this.

into the wild into thin air under the baern of heaven where when win glory and three cups of deceit. other than written by you what do they have in common? >> most of them had to do with people who-- fanatics. people who take things too far. take things to the logical extreme for-- it harms the person and those around them. >> rose: you have said they go-- it is the story of people, or it is the story of growing-- that grows out of obsessions. >> yeah. >> rose: stories that grow out of on sessions. >> yes, that is probably fair to say. for the most part, this book is different. >> rose: why dnted this fit. >> yeah, i wrote this-- this is a very different book. i wrote it for personal reasons. i felt compelled to write it after a young woman with whom i' very close she's almost like a daughter to me and my wife. i learned that she had been raped twice as a teenager. and i didn't know that until

ten years later. she turned up at a treatment facility for addiction and sexual assault. and was under-- in treatment for five or six months. and it was because the trauma of those assaults a decade earlier she had never gotten over it. i didn't-- you know i was ignorant i'm ashamed to say about the seriousness of sexual assault and also how prevalent it is. >> rose: it's been happening. we just haven't been seeing it reported. >> that's right. there's not an epidemic of new assaults. it's just always been there beneath the surface. people deny, deny the problem exists. >> rose: just ca valenti and -- new quote now should we treat women as independent agents responsibility for themselves of course but being responsible has nothing to do with being raped. women don't get raped because they were drinking or took drugs or women get raped because someone raped them. >> that's true. i love that quote. i mean misvalenti is right on the money.

everyone tries to oh, you were raped because you were drinking. you know, you put the blame on the victim which is absolutely wrong. you get raped because somebody raped you in the end. you know, the drinking issue i try not-- it is obvious fo me in this book that alcohol played a part in many of the rapes i described. but you know there's some research that shows that if you remove alcohol from the equation, the rate of rape wouldn't go up. i mean you know it stays the same is what i mean to say. that alcohol it's-- yeah, it plays a fact never so many rapes. but if drinking wasn't involved, there would be other reasons that people got raped. >> rose: and the most important point or one of the most important points is that it is not in the majority of cases from someone you didn't know. it's not the stranger who a costs you by coming up to your apartment and breaking in. >> that's right. >> rose: it's the person that you thought you knew

but didn't. >> 85% of rapes are done by acquaint angs of the victim. >> rose: am 5%. >> yeah, in many cases somebody that knows them well. the main character is a young woman named allison fugut who was raped by a football player without had been her best friend since the first grade. someone she trusted like a brother. and she went to a party. drank too much to drive home. was offered a couch to sleep on. went to sleep alone and woke up she was being raped by her best friend. and you know, people think oh it must be more traumatic being raped by a stranger without breaks into your apartment and threatens you with a gun it is actually more traumatic, probably to be raped by someone you trusted completely. because that destroys your trust in everything. >> rose: do you think in that in most 99% of the cases that the person who was raping a woman understands what he is doing? >> that's a good question.

and it's-- sometimes it's clearly, you know calculated, they know exactly what they're doing. but many times, maybe even most times because so many of these rapists have told themselves, you know it's the stranger breaking into the apartment, that what i am doing is no she was flirting with me. she wants it. i know she said no but she was leading me on. you know that is not right. >> rose: led me to believe. >> so i think in many many rapists don't understand that what they do is rape. the culture leads them to believe this is sport. i mean it's almost it's a conquest. it's for all kinds of reasons. you know, but and it is rape. i mean without a doubt. but they can convince themselves it's not. and you know, there is a lot-- there's a lot that needs to be done to educate young men about that. and old men. >> rose: because of the case the uva case did you accelerate this book into a publication day. >> there is a misunderstanding. the book was originally

slated for publication right now. but i was supposed to turn it in in september of 2014. i needed more time to finish it and finish the fact checking and have it be-- i don't turn books in until they are as good as i can make them. my publishers and editors understand them. so i turned it around new years, around christmas when it was done. and once they got it so you know, when i asked for three more months, four more months they said okay we'll just move it to the fall. when i turned it in it was ready t was fact checked virtually ready. they said huh we can crash this. so they rushed the publication date. the book was finished it is not like a compromised the book. >> rose: but why did they want to crash it. >> because it was so timely. and you know they're not going to publish it in the summer. either the fall or the spring. and all of this was going on. and the rolling stone fiasco was one more reason. it's like, well more reason than ever to publish in april because your book shows that women some women may lie but most women don't. an my book you know i

didn't know about the rolling stone mess but i relied on documents, on video tapes, audiotapes you know, i didn't take anyone's word. i certainly believed victims at first. but i corroborated everything. i had a paper trail. this is serious stuff. and you got to you really have to do your fact checking and i did that. >> what do you hope this book accomplishes? >> i hope it makes people-- i hope it raises awareness. about -- >> and eliminates myths. >> eliminates rapists i hope it emboldens other women to say-- look theres with a shift that began long before i started this book i don't know if it was two or five years ago or what ten years ago. but women started more women started coming forward and talking about their own assaults about yes i was raped. and i don't-- i'm not going to let myself feel schram because i did nothing that was shameful. the rapist did. and so that i i'm hoping that at some point and

maybe we're already there there is a tipping point where, you know, and i use this analogy it's like shall did -- it's like what happened with drunk driving. in 1980 before 1980 you know, a lot of people drove drunk. i drove drunk in my 20s. i didn't appreciate the seriousness of it. and then mothers against drunk driving started coming out with these horrifying statistics and numbers. and law enforcement began to get serious about arresting and convicting drunk drivers. and arrests went up 220% deaths went down. so maybe something like that will happen at some point with the problem of rape. >> how long did you work on this book? >> about three years. i started it in the summer of 2012. >> and how did you go about putting it together? >> you know, i wrote this because of this young woman who had been raped. so i didn't immediately think of the book. i just wanted to learn. i wanted to correct my ignorance.

so i just started-- i love research. i hate writing but i love research. so i'm just curious. so i started reading. i started looking at the news. and in no time i realized there is these rapes, scandals in the news all around the country. universities coast-to-coast. and i had many of them, you know a couple dozen at least. and one of them was this series of rapes in missoula montana, that was on my radar. and at some point in there i started thinking about a book. but when i went to missoula to go to a sentencing hearing for the man who raped allison fugat his name is beau donaldson. i went to that hearing. and allison is an amazing woman. a small swom woman she looks unassuming but when she was on the witness stand being badgered by this defense attorney, she stood up to him and wasn't cowed. she spoke her peace. she told the truth.

she, you know she wanted people to know this is the truth. and i was so impressed by her, you know, i just-- i thought wow, i was inspired by her. i wanted to put her in the book. so that was what lead, that moment when i saw her testifying. >> rose: what did you learn about the man who raiched her? >> he was by many accounts a good guy. he grew up in a poor working class family. but he did well. he was a decent student and a brilliant athlete. local missoula boy done good. he was recruited by the university of montana football team, the grizzlies where he became a good football player. no one could have seen this. he had done other things like this but he had kept them hidden. so it was a shocking for allison fugat to wake up in the middle of the night being raped by her best friend was shocking beyond description. and that changed the way she thought of him. you know during the sentencing hearing where the deciding what his sentence should be the defense

attorney kept asking, don't you think beau say good person. don't you think he deserves another chance. you always trusted him. she said well i don't know the person sitting over there. that is not-- the person without raped me is not the person i thought i knew. he has destroyed my faith in humanity. you know, i don't trust anyone any more. >> rose: did you hear that often, that somehow something about their lives had been-- well severely damaged. >> yeah i describe about one victim being sexually assaulted as a teenager turned her into a sort of ghost. the rapist robbed her innocence, turned her into this ghost who was forever trapped in the act of being violated for a decade. i mean that is sort of what it does. to be penetrated by another person in your most private places, is a different kind of trauma. it's hard to imagine if you yourself have not been sexually assaulted. and you know the rate of ptsd in rape victims is higher than the rates of

ptsd than soldiers and marines returning from combat in afghanistan and iraq. the symptoms are very similar. >> rose: how do you measure that. >> the military has really good statistics on ptsd in veterans. and you know academics are now coming up with statistics for ptsd in rape victims. >> how do you explain those cases in which victims get facts wrong? or b make false accusations? >> well, the studies show that-- . >> rose: when they do do that. >> so the 2 to 10% of women without do falsely accuse men, the research is pretty clear that most of the people you can find a reason. they wanted to expran a pregnancy to a partner, a husband, a boyfriend. they-- they have a reason they're trying to get revenge. sometimes it's simply because they dynams-- sometimes get facts wrong.

often confuse things. because too be traumatized that severely changes your brain chem industry. it changes the way you process memory. so your memory instead of being linear becomes impressionistic. and you can usually remember what happened but you know keeping track of the order or time span becomes difficult. that's why it's so important for police to when they first intergate a victim they need to believe him or her. it's usually a her. that's not to say they take them at their word. but you begin by believing. there is a campaign begin by believing. later you need to check the facts. but if you-- these people are traumized. if you go in there the old scoop cops you got a boyfriend? are you making this up? that doesn't work with traumatize victims am you have to just-- what were you feeling, what do you remember about how you felt. you draw out these details that can be used not only to convict the rapist if the rapist actually happened but also to exonerate the innocent. so you begin by believing. >> in some cities they have sex crimes units in the

prosecutor's office. >> yup. >> an often they are run by women. >> yup. >> but is prosecution of rape a problem? >> it's very difficult. it's very difficult. the criminal justice system is not well constructed for the conviction of rapists. because the standard the burden of proof is so high. >> and what about if it happened in a university community and the response of the university. >> university -- >> not the legal machinery but the university. >> the university there is no standard policy for how universities adjudicate rape. and that's a huge problem and that needs to change. every university is different. a few of them do a pretty good job. most do a terrible job. they have system tas are fair either to the victim nor the assailant. so but in missoula in the university of montana their system was better than many. and but it hinged on the dean of students, in the cases i examined for most of the time it was a guy named charles couture t was his

job to act as kind of the prosecutor. and he would-- there's no rules of evidence. you can't imprison anyone at a university. you can't put them on a list of sex offenders am all you can do is expel them basically. so you don't need this really difficult burden of proof, this high bar. you can lower the bar to the federal government has mandated that universities use the lower measure of a preponderance of evidence just more likely than not that this rape occurred. so universities don't have to go through you know they try to keep lawyers uninvolved or the lawyers can be present. they don't want to get lost in procedure. they want to get to the truth. the universities, the good ones want to find out the truth quickly and if they find out they got raped you get rid of them. there is usually several layers. the dean might determine if you are guilty. the accused can appeal to a higher level and eventually to a university court in montana's case. >> and what did the retracted rolling stone article contribute to the debate about rape? >> i'm not sure there is a

debate about rape but the coverage of rape. >> it didn't contribute. it set back the conference about rape. because there are a lot of people out there for whatever reason, do not believe there is a rape problem. they are deniers saying it is rape hysteria. there is this false statistic that was just repeated by a reviewer in "the wall street journal" that says no ca krauer is not wrong it is not 10% t is older studies show it is 40 to 50%. the rape deniers use that 40 to 50%. but those studies have been thoroughly debunked. that's wrong. but there are people out there who are waiting for ammunition to say no, women lie. there isn't a rape problem. and the rolling stone fiasco gave them all-- a lot of ammunition set things back. you know, that story was not true. the rolling stone reporters and editors did not do their due diligence-- diligence they -- do their fact checking am you can blame the woman who falsely accused fraternity boys. but you know this would

have never hap if the magazine had done what it was supposed to. >> rose: how are you received in missoula? >> not well not well. missoula feels-- missoula is a wonderful town. they feel this scandal has been going on since it broke a local reporter gwyn flory broke it in 2011. and they feel like they're under fire. they feel their town has been besmirched, impugned. and so-- . >> rose: do they have a point? >> no, this needed to come out. >> rose: no, i mean that. i mean in terms of are they different than other colleges. >> no no that is true. missoula is actually has a slightly lower rate of rape apparently than other towns its size. that is the disturbing thing. missoula is typical. but i mean miss allians are very up set that the title of my book is missoula. why couldn't you name it something else it didn't occur to me that they would be this up set.

i pointed out that the title-- . >> rose: if you had to do it over would you maim it something. >> no, missoula rape and the justice system in college town, it is not sensational. it describes exactly what the book is about. so you know i don't know-- i'm sorry people are up set about it. but you know missoula you know, they say we're no worse than anyone else. that's nothing to brag about. i mean missoula had a problem. it's improved. missoula is better tauf off than most places because the department of justice thanks to learning about this series of rapes investigated them and compelled the university the police department and the prosecutors office to change their ways. improve their ways of handling rape cases. and they have. and the town is safer for women as a consequence. >> rose: the book is called missoula rape and the justice system in a college town jon ca krauer, thank you, swron. >> thank you. >> rose: good to see you. back in a moment, stay with us. >> julianna margulies is here. she is an emmy award-winning

actor. she first became known as nurse carroll hathaway on the long running series er. she now stars on the acclaimed cb sdrama "the good wife" she plays the wuf of a disgraced states attorney who reent ares the workforce. emily newsbaum writes the good wife is among the most ambitious, morally complex dramas on either network on cable television. here's a look at the good wife. >> this is how i would answer your question mr. mancini. how dare you sir. do you have a personal life? do you have a spouse? do you know what it would be like to have your personal life spilled across the the stage like this? broadcasted into the home of your friends your work mates, your daughters friends at school? do you know what that would be like. it would be one thing if my job had anything to do with my husband's infidelity. i'm not even sure what job that would be. but your question would at least then be pertinent. but i'm running for states attorney. i'm running to be someone to put a dent in crime in this

town. what does that have to do with my married life? >> i'm pleased to have julianna margulies back at this table. welcome. >> thank you so much. >> rose: so there she is we're going to finish episode-- final episode of series six. >> is may 119 right. three more to go. >> rose: so where is she? at this moment? >> well sadly she's a long way from there. it's been quite a journey with alecia this year. and it's been so interesting to play her. >> rose: she's now running for states attorney. >> she ran for states attorney. and she wins. >> rose: right. >> and then she gets thrown under the bus by the democratic committee because they-- there is an accusation of voter fraud which she had nothing to do with but it had to do with one of the senate seats. and they say just take one for the party. and they throw her under the bus and she has to conoco seed and she does. and frack then gets rightfully crowned. but it really had nothing to do with either of them or their runs for an office which she rightfully wonment

but it was a very clever way that robert and michelle managed to, i think make politics for women especially running interesting and yet not have her be-- the truth is when i asked if she was going to win. they said from the beginning, no. because the show is more interesting to write when you're in the law firm. being states attorney means you are constantly prosecuting criminals rather than being with them. >> rose: yes. >> so the great characters like you know lamond bishop and my sweet dylan baker those character was sort of fall to the wayside. an that's what keeps our show so rich. >> rose: but was this a year of change for the series. >> it was a year of change. it was a big year of change. and i think that's the luckry of doing 22 episodes a year ask that we have a slow burn. we don't need to throw everything in your face in eight episodes. and feel like we have told our story. we get to really unfold a

story and let the audience warm up to these characters and learn who they are. so the that things make sense when they happen. >> rose: so the title in the beginning reflected the wife of a disgraced politician. >> yeah. >> rose: the good wife. >> the good wife right. >> rose: you were titling this show now what would you call it? >> wow that's a great question. you know, i think alecia's moral center. >> rose: the bishop's wife? >> the vengful wife. >> no, i think i would call her the flawed wife. >> rose: the flawed wife. >> yeah. probably. >> rose: flawed by the-- by the necessity of survival? >> yeah, i think she constantly wants to do the right thing and is constantly provoked by power and finding her way in the world. but she wants to do the right thing. >> rose: but she also wants to -- >> she had a beautiful scene with stock ard channing who plays my mom earlier this season where she just looks at her and says i always clean up people's messes

don't i. just like that. that's what dad did. people make messes and i clean them up. and i think ultimately that is who she is. she is the good girl. she was raised that way. because her mother was so obviously isn't. and she never wanted to be like her mother. so she did the thing. she gave up the job and the career to be the good wife. and it stabbed her in the back. and yet at the same time it made her who she is. she has a lot of power because of what happened and found herself in many ways. and now she's refinding herself in another situation. >> rose: are they different than hollywood producers you know in terms of television series-- television producers? >> yes. >> rose: how so? >> they're incredibly-- . >> rose: it's called smarter television by some. >> yeah. they're incredibly incredibly bright. robert reeds and-- reads and i don't know how he finds the time because he writes pretty much-- we have

a writer room but robert does the last pass on every episode, he directs four episodes a year. michelle and robert are involved in a way that most producers at this stage in the game of a series especially a network series 122 a year start to do another-- 22 a year start to do another series and leave it to a show runner. they don't do that. they are 100-- 100% involved. >> rose: they are the runner director and writers. >> yes, and they're there all the time. the writers room is in l.a. oftentimes we start at 6:00 in the morning. there might be a problem. if i call on behalf of another actor or whatever the problem is that arises they pick up the phone. they respond. they want this to be a collaboration. you know, the three of us are very much on the same page. and i really try-- i'm always surprised honestly when guest actors will come in or-- and say i condition say this line. because i always think, oh god, trust the writing. it's your job to make that

line work. that's a great line. make it work you know. they're so good at that. and that's why the show, i think, is such a success. i wish i spoke more like alecia. i wish i knew how to answer like she does. they're smart people. an they're very connected to what they're doing. they are not disconnected at all. >> rose: and you get it with great costars. >> unbelievable. i mean to go into work. allen cumming, christine, i mean it's often-- it's often just an embarrass am of riches you know. there's usually two to three tony award-winning actor i'm working with per day. >> rose: exactly. >> when you were in new york did you all know that shall did -- i mean was it a sense that this was special and that george was special and that george was somehow-- had this, you know leading man potential? >> i can't speak for other people. i was so new to the game then, you know i was 26 years old and bright-eyed and bushy-tailed and i sort of didn't realize what it meant to be on a legal-- on a network drama.

and so to me george was always-- i always looked at him that way yes. >> rose: because he looks that way in part. >> well, he just has such-- he's a charismatic unbelievably gracious and humble human being. there is nothing about him that is pretentious at all. and he really was-- his star was rising pretty high within our secretary season. and he was still such a game player with us. so yeah, i think we-- george was the one without kept letting us know. because he had done 14 failed pilots. so he was-- . >> rose: they always believed had nim. >> and always believed in us. i'm here today because of les, les moonves ebb i have had success in is because les moonves. he put er on the air. nbc didn't want to air it. he was head of warner brother television. warren littlefield did to the want to put er on the air. les moonves said i will pay if this show fails.

and he put it on the air. and same with the good wife. without wanted to see a show about a politician's wife you know? so i think i owe most of my career to les moonves and george clooney quite frackly, because george was the one-- . >> rose: weren't you married to george? what was the relationship between your character and george's character. >> well we have-- we have twins. we had twins together. we were the romantic couple on that show. but we never actually got married. but george was the one my character was supposed to die in the pilot of er and george was-- i was ready to go off and do homicide life on the street which i had had a recurring role on and loved and loved tom fontana who-- who had put me in a pilot that abc had said no no no. she looks too ethnic. she can't just be an american person. and he had given me a part as a nurse in a pilot called phillie heat. which didn't get picked up and then he put me on to homicide life on the street. and george called me and

said, the pilot got picked up. don't take another job. i think your character is going to live. because i died in the pilot. and no one else bother toad do that. because i would have signed on, you know, i was busing tables. i needed a job so i was going to take the other job. and i waited and i said to tom, don't hate me but i think this other show might go. >> rose: can you tell by what you already know the final episode is-- what will the next season will be? is it a giant indicator as to where next year will be? >> it's very clever how the kings do this is it seems to be that we end the final episode with how the next season will begin always. and this year i don't want to give anything away but it's kind of brilliant what they did. you know the only bad thing is we all have to make sure our hair stays the same length and we don't get suntanned, because you know allen last year, you are episode ended with allen

asking me to run for states attorney and then he started doing cabaret and his hair was died pitch-black and so when we came back they were trying to gray it up like eli. an there were a lot of comments on-- it looks like the same settup but why is his hair changed? >> rose: how was it different for charles not to be there? >> i miss josh every day. i will be honest. he is-- i think an exoption-- exceptional actorment and he and i together he is an old dear friend, i have known him forever. and we just worked really well together. and he and christine worked really well together. and those two relationships were really pivotal. christine and josh and mine and josh were pivotal to the show. what is incredible aside from missing him because i just had so much fun working with him is that what it did was open up our characters to have other experiences. so it actually kept the writing fresh which as horrible as it is to lose a

character for a show that has to do 22 episodes a year it actually feeds blood lines, you know. and it opens up friendships that you don't know you would have had. so in a certain way t gave new energy. but i mission working with him all the time. >> rose: is sunday night a good time for the good wife? >> well, right now i don't think so. because you've got game of tloenses you have mad men finale, i mean you have veep all these shows that are on now. it's almost like it's just sundays have become the place to be. i am so grateful to our audience because we don't seem to lose any audience participation. they are there with us. and we get put on weird football schedules. and i think les moonves and nina tasler decided to keep us there because we have not lost any of our viewership. even though they are cranky. they get very cranky especially during football season. >> rose: it seems to me in reading about your show at the beginning of the year, early on people were talking

about how smart it was and listed by many critics as their favorite show. a lot of people have seen this year, began to say you can't miss it. >> yeah. >> and was's been amazing in the 60s is how many men have abandoned-- abandoned this i done watch the show call the good wife. which is i think the network's father in the beginning to isolate men if the show is called the good wife, it must only be about women. >> now there is an incredible resurgence of male energy we're getting on the show because they are realizing it is not just a female show an this is a show about everybody. >> rose: what is the show about? >> you know it's a show about politics and law and human feelings and relationships. and,. >> rose: and good guys and bad guys. >> good guys and bad guys and how good guys become bad guys and how bad guys have a chance to become good guys. >> i really think there is this moral center to the show that the lead character constantly doesn't know

which side of that line to go on. an that's what is interesting, you know. how do we create a character. >> rose: the dilemma of the lead character. >> right. and this, it is a slippery slope, what is ultimately the right thing to do. because if you are running for politics and you do want to clean up a corrupt states attorney's office there are certain things you have to do to get there. but then when you do with ed asner who played this wonderful character, who gives her a million dollars then suddenly she feels like i'm supposed to be his puppet now i don't think so and then she gets the reality check from eli which i love her relationship with eli. it's a fantastic, you know, sometimes it's just a comedy of errors with the two of them. because she can call him on his bluff too. but it really is a show, i think, about a moral center and where do he with go. and their finger robert and michelle, the finger is on the pulse constantly. that they wrote a slow four months ago and we shot it

three months ago about gay marriage and what if means to have a wedding planner refuse your wedding as a gay couple. and then get sued. and then it was an issuement and we aired it and people said oh, well, they're just copying life. it takes us months to do a show. you know so they have their finger on the pulse. and i don't know how they do it. >> rose: but in the beginning was the original idea based on the spitzer? >> they say it was based on a lot of these political wives that they --. >> rose: . >> but that the pilot where you see her behind in the very-- which to me will still remain one of my favorite scenes in the entire show of her just plucking this piece of lint off his suit in the middle of this press conference. you just see that was based on the spitzers for sure. and robert and michelle saying what happens when they go into the green room. after that moment what happens to these people. how does she respond.

and it still is one of my favorite scenes of just her walking down the hallway and stopping and slapping him in the face and saying then she tries to leave and there is the paparazzi. she has nowhere to go. i just think-- . >> rose: she was a very accomplished woman and how does she not respect their life even-- let this affect their life even though it clearly affected the marriage. >> and the children's lives. >> take a look at this-- . >> rose: take a look at this this is eli and you running for office. >> the election is in eight months debate in six and the candidate announcement monday. >> this monday? >> yes that is the filing deadline. >> that is in four days. >> yes, but the good news is we're ready to go. we have a plan in place we have done some initial polling. alecia, things just move faster now. they just do. >> you haved polling? >> yes. >> if the election were held today and the on candidates were you and castro you would win by eight point points.

>> so you think it will just be me an castro. >> wait a minute, you have to hear these four. eight points. you would win by eight points. >> yes. that's good right. >> that's not just good, that's remarkable. that kind of gap doesn't exist in cook county. >> i just don't think it lasts. good news tends not to last. >> and that's what i like about you. you're always looking for the bad. but there is so many disasters in a campaign that you have to acknowledge the nondisasters when they happen. >> good, so people don't really know me yet. and castro will try to define me. >> before you define yourself. >> go after the clients i represent. >> correct, you are are a brand now. >> i wish you would say that with at least a hint of irony. >> no, irony is dead now are you campaigning. jfk could be funny, you can't. there are too many bloggers quoter every ironic comment. >> stop joking. >> it opens the dialogue, is what i like. >> it's so much fun to do. >> so much energy and so much sort of rapid fire. >> which is smart.

>> it's smart dialogue which is why i'm always amazed when-- i did six episodes on the sopranos. and which was an amazing experience. and i remember michael imperiolei were very specific about ifs ands or buts, you didn't change anything in the dialogue. i remember doing this scene with him. and the script supervisor came over and said no no it's if, not and. and his reaction to it was oh yeah that's some of better. and i really took something from that. it was respect for the writing, and an understanding that it's wran for a reason. and it makes your job easier as an acker if you can trust the writing. which is why i really try to be wordperfect. and not put in every now and then maybe something doesn't sound right in a sentence or there will be a different you know, past tense way present tense that you have to change it. but forthe most part, i think it is such an important lesson for ackers

especially when you are on a television show, i have so many other things to think about, i don't have to think about the writing. i get to just learn it and say it and think how i'm going to act it right. >> take a look at this. this is 1998. you at this table. >> oh my god. >> rose: 17 years ago talking about your dream. here it is roll tape. >> i feel like i'm living the dream that i've always had, to be honest. what i would love is to be able to finish er and still be intact but that's a lot of work. and be able to move on and be able to do a film or two a year and go back to theater and come home to new york and raise kids one day and hopefully stay in this side of the world. and just try and stay grounded and level headed and be able to give back what i have been given. >> rose: wow. >> wow. it's like this is your life moment rpz i know, wasn't that great though. and you look just the same.

>> well. >> rose: well,ed hair pulled back. >> yes, thank you. >> rose: you have the kids? >> yeah, wu i can't believe i said that. and here mi. >> rose: here you are. it's like the dream came true. >> it kim true. i did. i came back to new york. i did a john robbins baitz play at lincoln center. and i got did a couple independent movies did another play, i did some great, great miniseries and then i met my husband and hi a baby and then i got this show and i'm here in new york. >> rose: the golden age for television and the gold enage for you. >> i feel like, i mean hi two golden ages of television. it's really remarkable that-- because when i was on r, that thursday night line-up, you know t was friends, seinfeld frasier erment and it was called the golden age of television. and then there was a gap where it went away and then i got it again. and i feel so grateful because all these incredible actors are coming to television now.

move-year stars are doing television there doesn't seem to be graden carter actually said-- i did a magazine shoot for "vanity fair" with women on television, with claire takens and sofia vergara and michelle dockery. and it was talking about women on television. and in the easyitiers letter he said-- editor's letter he said don't you remember when we were kids television was for kids and movies were for adults? but now let's be honest movies are for kids, an television is for adults. and i thought that was so-- such an elegant way of saying, it's right there in your living room. and it really iss. because i think writers and directors have much more freedom in television. >> and the stories are some of better told. what you have now is the quality of the acting and the people who are coming to television because they have time to develop characters. because they have the best writing coming to television. >> yeah. >> and because people

appreciate the fact. and then with all the technology that has come in you can have binge viewing. >> it changed the well -- >> you can watch it whenever you want to watch it. >> and you can watch all 22-- i have people tell me for three weeks they bring watch five seasons. listen i love film. and i don't want to take away from what film is. but it has changed you know. the sequells and all of that. there are still great films out there. but i think what agers are finldzing, especially women are inding that the audience wants to see women and it is a great time to be a woman in television. in many ways. we have a lot further to go. but i do believe that there are more women starring in their own shows this year than there ever has been in the history of television. and that's huge. and it's much more so than film. you'll never see the kind of women that you see in television on film. you just don't see them. >> rose: thank you for coming. >> thank you for having me.

>> pleasure. >> rose: it was so fun. >> thank you for joining us. we'll see you next time. >> for more about this program and earlier episodes, visit us on-line at pbs.org and charlie rose.com. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org

. this is "nighlty business re" with tyler mathisen and sue herera. >> signs of optimism mcdonald's and coke two ike onic brands have a tough time around but big tusharns might be making progress. >> house party. house sales surge for the biggest in 18 months but not everything is in bloom. >> the grapes of wrath, why a raisin farmer is getting his day in court. the supreme court. all of that and more tonight on "nighlty business re" for wednesday, april 22nd. good evening and welcome i'm sue herera. >> and i'm bill griffeth in tonight for tyler mathisen. we start with mcdonald's and coke two of the world's most recognizable brands and two companies that have been mired in a