I think it would be a mistake for social media companies to try to, on their own, determine or deign what is a fake news story and what isn't and shut it off, or what's a good news organization or a bad news organization. That's a very, very slippery slope.

Some news organizations made a mistake with the iPad in saying, 'Oh, it's a big iPhone.' The fact is the way people use the tablet versus the iPhone is so completely different which is why our iPhone and iPad apps look nothing alike.

There's a lot of definitions flying around of what we mean when we say fake news. And there's also a lot of pitfalls and I think some misguided recommendations that are out there about what Facebook and Twitter and the others should and shouldn't do. It's very difficult and I, you know, recommend sort of very thoughtful slow going for everyone.

Social media is the greatest boon to journalism since the printing press.

My definition of fake news is a content-like object that is a story, an article, a video, a tweet that has been fabricated, completely invented out of thin air, intentionally for the purpose of misleading.

A so-called news organization called the Denver Guardian - which, by the way, doesn't exist - wrote an article and pushed it on social media that said that the pope had endorsed Donald Trump. That's the perfect definition of fake news. It was intentionally designed to deceive.

The big opportunity - and where the most disruption is - is in local media.

One thing that is wrongly hyped is social media For many media organizations, they think it of it as distribution, and yes it's good for that. What's missing is the power of social media for engagement with the audience and for newsgathering.