I'm going to talk about open access in the context of neoliberalised academy and about ways of thinking about open access that bring the focus back on values and ethics rather than boring things like compliance rates and citation advantages. Over the past five years or so there's been significant progress made in what we like to optimistically call a transition to open access. In the UK a lot of this work has been done by people working in libraries to implement research funder policies. But we're clearly still a long way from anything approaching full open access especially when you consider monographs. Even though there's a broad consensus at the policy level that it's both necessary and achievable. And there are different ideas about both the best course or courses of action for increasing open access and also about why it's a good thing in the first place.  So this is just going to be citations to what I'm saying. So for a lot of people who are drawn to open movements whether that's open education, open source software or open access. The attraction is that openness in this sense is this unique combination of legal and community structures. It's designed to enable freedom for human creativity to allow us to explore what we can create together when there are fewer restrictions on our actions. You can see this most clearly in free and open source software where that's the origin of this particular use of the word open. Where the combination of open licenses that legally define what people are permitted to do and open community software development processes. That combination is what makes that free software unique and successful to an extent. But when the coalition government in the UK started heavily advocating for openness and transparency they had a different agenda. So for them openness in government or in public sector is about how best to allow private capital access to exploit public resources to generate an extract profit. So open access fits into that narrative well because they can view it as making more efficient use of public expenditure. Because wider access to research would supposedly stimulate economic activity. So from white hold it's been promoted for purely economic reasons. From the point of view of those of us who became passionate about openness for social justice reasons and its potential for more equitably distributing the collective knowledge of humanity. This looks like open access has been coopted by vested interests who wish to maintain existing power structures. So the quarter papers for this conference talks about a culture that works collectively towards equity and the betterment of society for all. But openness is not enough by itself to do this if justice and an ethical stance are not foregrounded in everything we do. In fact openness has been adapted to fit neatly with the neoliberal policy agenda. So neoliberalism is a complex ideology so it's not easy to define. If you want the long version you can read my thesis. It's online there in draft form. I haven't submitted yet. The short definition I use is political projects to reshape all social relations to conform to the logic of capital. So this involves processes of marketisation, commodification and turning public goods over to the private sector. All of which we've seen at work in the higher education sector for some time. So the idea that education should be transformed into quantifiable units that can be exchanged in a marketplace for a given price is not a natural or necessary way to think about learning. But it's been a dominant way of viewing things in public policy for some time. So under neoliberal regimes policy is designed to encourage us to think in a self-interested transactional way about how we all interact with each other. It turns us all not into capitalists exactly but rather into many capital ourselves. The term human capital is meant literally to act as what has been termed entrepreneurs of ourselves. So in higher education this is reflected in the quantification and metricisation of every aspect of our lives in universities, whether that's through the tuition fees that put price on the supposed value of education to turn students into consumers who are meant to make decisions about what and where to study based on rational indicators of projected future-earned income. Or through the rankings that put universities and departments against each other. We've had a new one and ours just today in the time to hire. There's so many ways academics are forced to act competitively amongst themselves rather than cooperatively. So it takes us a long way from traditional notions of the university as a self-critical community of scholars. The neoliberalism in education is not just about the overtly financial things like tuition fees. It's about enforcing a market-like way of thinking about every aspect of our behaviour. So the influence of neoliberalism on open access policy I think is clear in the capitulation in the Finch report to an APC-funded version of Gold Open Access specifically designed to allow incumbent publishers to maintain existing profit levels as opposed to allowing the wider community to imagine alternative collective models of creating a sustainable open access environment. The Finch report pretended that no alternatives exist and that was wrong. As the recommendations from the report were adopted in different ways by the research councils and funding councils, some of the misconceptions the report was based on have now fed through into these policies that were based on the report. The most obvious way this has happened is probably the conflation of open access with a specific payment model, the idea that APCs are the only way forward, which is clearly not true. But also in other ways such as tying open access to REF, which many academics view with scepticism if not outright hostility. So I still think open access is a good thing, but it's not a panacea. Wider access to scholarship does not necessarily mean that all inequalities have been dissolved in relation to that scholarship. The question of who gets to participate, whose voices are heard, is still open. So if we only pay attention to equitable distribution of scholarly wealth rather than equitable access to the creation of that common wealth, then the future we're building is still exclusionary. So if viewing open access as a commons might offer a way forward. Commons referred to resources that are used by many people in common, and the particular rules that govern the use of these resources. So I want us to think about what collective governance means for open access. I'm using the word commons in a similar sense to Eleanor Ostrom who, by examining the ways that different long-enduring commons have been organised, showed us that one of the defining attributes of a successful commons is self-governance. In other words, effective governance of a commons must include the community that sustains and uses the resource in the decision-making process. If orders are imposed, top-down, that cannot be a commons. A commons can only be governed collectively with joint responsibility for decision-making and sustainability. So to talk about scholarly commons doesn't mean a single undifferentiated commons, kind of one global pool of knowledge resources, a more fluid digital version of what some people imagine is contained in this building. Instead, I'm talking about a plurality of local commons attuned to the needs of different communities. This cuts to the problem of relying on mandates from central authorities to enact progress. That kind of approach doesn't allow for a diversity of perspectives to emerge, and that's what we need. So it's important to create spaces for that to happen, such as the Radical Open Access Collective, which I mentioned the other day, and Radical Librarians Collective, where people can explore alternative values from those found in mainstream library and publishing communities. One value that's present in these discussions is an ethics of care. So, when I talk about an ethics of care, I'm using those words in quite a loose sense, with apologies for any actual ethical philosophers in the room, if there aren't any, to mean taking an ethical stance towards our colleagues as human beings with complex needs that can't be squeezed into market-like patterns of behaviour without losing sight of what actually matters. That way of thinking is not compatible with neoliberal ideology. Neoliberalism only cares about people in as far as they are exchangeable units expressing a value in a marketplace, not as human beings. So there's no space for the attentiveness and responsiveness to both individual and collective needs that is embodied in the concept of care. So an ethics of care can be an anti-neoliberal strategy to inform our collective action towards building and sustaining scholarly commons more aligned with the values of the library community. If openness and access to knowledge are at the heart of library values, and that is not a given when we look at the darker side of library history, we should be working within our local communities towards a commons-based knowledge ecology that embodies that perspective. So in the UK, beginnings of this are already here in the emergence of new open access university presses like White Rose that we heard about, and scholar that open access publishes. So I'd like to mention just a few examples of initiatives that do embody different ways of thinking. So there's mattering press who believe that the work matters and that the people that do the work also matter, and the whole process of writing and publishing books should be undertaken with care. Then we have punkton books who are not based in the UK, but they explicitly seek to work with those scholars that have been discarded by conventional academia whose work doesn't fit within current constraints. It's not breathable. Of course, open library of humanities who are funded by a library partnership scheme that gives collective responsibility to the library and academic communities. That collectivity element is vital. The strike actions of the past few weeks have been a strong reminder that collective action can work when we organise an act of unity. It can achieve real change, or in the case of the current action, prevent an unnecessary and destructive change. The strength in union doesn't rest in the leadership, it's in the members, they are the union. That's worth bearing in mind when we think about collective action in the library space because we have a potentially powerful collective bargaining tool within the library sector already and the consortium negotiations led by GIST collections. They have the potential to achieve much more radical agreements if library directors lend their support collectively and think beyond what is politically acceptable in your own institutions right now towards what a sustainable long-term settlement might look like. The examples of scholar-led presses I just mentioned are just a few of many, ones that I'm personally familiar with. I'm not saying that any of them have come up with the way that open access should be done because the point is that maybe many ways of working that depend on local or disciplinary needs that vary depending on where you are in the world and what your priorities are as a scholar or as a publisher or as a librarian. I know I've just talked about the necessity of having different small and local initiatives at the same time as calling for more large-scale collective action but I don't think those are in conflict. I'm asking you to imagine what can be achieved when we centre our collective needs and desires and build governance structures and sustainable means of supporting each other that enable the flourishing of research and scholarly publishing outside of constraints of a market-driven system. Thank you.


It's time for the Lawn Gene Chronoscope, a television journal of the important issues of the hour, brought to you every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. A presentation of the Lawn Gene Witner Watch Company, maker of Lawn Gene, the world's most honored watch, and Witner, distinguished companion to the world-honored Lawn Gene. Good evening. This is Frank Knight. May I introduce our co-editors for this edition of the Lawn Gene Chronoscope? Mr. William Bradford Huey, editor of the American Mercury, and Mr. Henry Hazlet, contributing editor of Newsweek Magazine. Our distinguished guest for this evening is the honorable Hugh D. Scott, Jr., United States representative from Pennsylvania. The opinions expressed are necessarily those of the speakers. Congressman Scott is former head of the Republican National Committee, and as one of the architects of the Eisenhower campaign, I'd like to begin by asking you when's the campaign going to start? Tomorrow, about the middle of the day, I would say, Eisenhower makes an important speech in Atlanta, Georgia. That will be followed by speeches in other Florida cities, in Alabama, in Arkansas, and then by a very important foreign policy speech in Philadelphia on the 4th of September. Well, could you tell us what topics he's going to speak on today? On these first speeches prior to the Philadelphia speech, he will talk generally on the mess in Washington, what he thinks about it, with some specific instances. And I am quite sure, because I have some advanced information that they will be very forthright, fighting speeches. He agrees with Governor Stevenson that there is a mess in Washington? Well, I'm sure he agrees with Governor Stevenson that there's a mess in Washington. I'm sure that he's very angry about it. There's a moral fervor in the way in which he prepares his speeches, and I think we're going to get the benefit of that. His fight, after all, as I see it, is against Harry Truman's bad government and Harry Truman's captive candidate, and Harry Truman's having taken the leadership of this campaign. Stevenson's a secondary issue, and Truman in his Milwaukee Labor Day speech, you recall, has said in effect to Stevenson, watch how I do it. I'm the boss, I run this thing, and you take your lead from me. You think the battle from this point on will be essentially between President Truman and General Eisenhower? I think so, because I don't think that Truman could keep out of it. I don't think that the issue of trumanism, which is equivalent to bad government, could possibly be kept out of it. And I think that Mr. Truman's captive candidate is just stuck with Harry. You think that there has been the feeling that General Eisenhower first could not effectively make the case against the Democratic Party, and then second that probably he would not make the case. Now are you convinced, sir, after your weeks that you spent with him, that General Eisenhower is going to prosecute the case against the Democratic Party? Yes, I'm satisfied that he's going to prosecute the case against the present administration which goes on to the title of Democratic. There's nothing Democrat or Democratic about it. It's trumanism. It's a mess. That's the best way to put it. Well, do you think there has been the statement that he would not resort to personalities? Now that the President has attacked him, do you think that he will at least resort to the personality of the President? I think that he can attack this whole thing that's wrong without necessarily calling anybody any bad names, because the bad odor and the bad names have already been established. I think it's his job to point out what's wrong with the government in power. Well, let's take one other personality, namely the Secretary of State. I believe that Mr. Stevenson's own record is having said that he didn't have the faintest idea whether he would discharge Mr. Atchison or not. Do you think that General Eisenhower has something of a firmer idea as to a course of action there?  I have no question he would be fired, but I think Atchison will resign on the first Wednesday after the first Tuesday of the month. But an American voter at least can make a choice on that point. If Stevenson doesn't know whether he will get rid of Atchison, but if he does choose Eisenhower, he knows he can get rid of Atchison. Stevenson is the captive and the victim of men who are pretty smart, and among those men are Dean Atchison, who has controlled the foreign policy of this country to its severe detriment. The man who has led us down the road to weakness in the face of tyranny. The man who hasn't hesitated to deal with those who are enemies of our government in a weak need, a mollycoddle, milk and water fashion. The man has got to go, and Eisenhower, there's no question he'd go under Stevenson. I don't think Stevenson is in the position where he can get rid of these old men of the sea that have been paying to the Democratic ship. Well, General Eisenhower has said that some terrible blunders were made in Korea and are getting into Korea. Now, is he going to spell out and detail what those blunders were? I'm quite sure that he is going to spell them out because he will make several speeches on foreign policy, and one of them inevitably, or more than one, would have to deal with the kind of a war that we've gotten into which we can neither win, nor lose, nor stop. And when Mr. Truman and his Labor Day speech spoke of all those people who had benefited so much from, as he said, from a higher wage, I can think of 137,000 casualties in Korea who will never benefit from anything that Mr. Truman has done. Is General Eisenhower going to defend the Taft-Partley Act against the attacks of Stevenson and of the President? I think that General Eisenhower would rightly take the position, and I cannot undertake, obviously, to speak for him, but I would believe that he would take the Republican position, which is that the Labor Management Act of 1947 operates fairly in the interest of people who are in labor, union labor, or non-union labor. I think, again, Mr. Truman has given us the key to it. When he points out that union labor used to have 3 million people. Since the Labor Management Act or the Taft-Partley Act of 1947, there are now 16 million people in unions. All of them better pay it. All of them with better living conditions. The Taft-Partley Act has been a good and a beneficent act, and it has worked to the advantage of labor. Well, how did the majority of Democrats in Congress think about these attacks on the Taft-Partley Act? Didn't the majority, both of the House and of the Senate, vote for the Taft-Partley Act? I'm speaking to the Democratic majority at the time. Mr. Eisenhower, it's my recollection that they did. I think they did. And didn't they also, majority in Congress, also recommend or express the hope that the President would use the Taft-Partley Act in the steel strike? Of course they did, and more than that, you'll be interested in an rather old incident. The late chairman of the House Labor Committee was Mr. Lysinski of Michigan. Mr. Lysinski, on one celebrate occasion, said to one of the Republican members of the committee, we are not going to do anything to repeal Taft-Partley or to change it, because we'd rather have it as an issue than do anything about it. And that's Mr. Truman's position, and it necessarily has to be Mr. Stevenson's position if he were to be the chief executive. Mr. Scott, a great deal has been said about errors in the Eisenhower campaign thus far. As one of the Eisenhower strategists, do you think that there have been any errors in the other camp? Well, I, of course, always thank a wise providence for the Democratic National Committee. I think they've made quite a few errors. They must have been working pretty hard at it in the short time they've had. The cabinet meeting which showed that Stevenson was called to Washington to get his orders from Harry was one instance of it. That showed that the hand is the hand of, the voice is the voice of Jacob, but the hand is the hand of Esau. And you remember that was a Harry hand? The same thing true. The voice is the voice of Adley. The hand is Harry. On our, on our program last week, Mr. Jim Farley made some rather critical statements about the Eisenhower campaign. Before you go on, Mr. Huey, I did want to mention another blunder, and that was the fact that Mr. Stevenson admits that there's a mess in Washington. Now, he's going to try to back away from it, but he said it. And he's good at these six syllable words, but he stumbled on that little four letter word mess and he swallowed it whole. Mr. Farley, however, made some definite predictions, and he has some reputation as a predictor, I believe. And we'd like tonight, I'm sure that our viewers would like you to predict somewhat the way that you think the campaign will develop and the way the nation will vote. Do you think Eisenhower specifically has a chance to get any southern states? Well, I'm not in Jim Farley's league as a predictor, but I did predict that Eisenhower would lead his opponent on the first ballot by 100 votes and I predicted it to use to have a man a month beforehand. I only missed it by five votes. I would say that if I may venture into Mr. Farley's field that Eisenhower will win, that he will carry several southern states, that he will have the support of all groups and classes and kinds and conditions of Americans because he's not a sectarian or a sectional candidate. Would you care to name the national candidate? Would you care to name the southern states that you think General Eisenhower can carry? I think it might be unfair to those people who are working so hard in all the southern states to point the finger that's commonly said that among those are Virginia, Texas. I would think that Louisiana with its immense reaction against the Thailand situation would be one, Florida and there others. Well, General Eisenhower, take the position of Texas on the Thailand's case or take the position that Shivers believes in. Well, I understand that he has substantially taken this position that Texas had a treaty with the United States. Texas reserved the right to all of its lands, including those offshore and the United States ought not to break any treaty, including one with Texas. The Texans don't like it either. They're often mad about it, I think. Well then, as I understand you, sir, you are one of those supporters of Eisenhower who's completely convinced that the general will carry on a very forthright slugging campaign from this point on. Yes, I'm satisfied of it. I reminded Jim Farley the other day that there's a maxim which he may have invented, that you never campaign the straw hat. Naturally, those people who want Eisenhower to win and there's so many of them are anxious for him to get started early, but Labor Day is usually the start of the campaign. And you expect it to start. Well, thank you very much for being with us tonight, Mr. Sky. The editorial board for this edition of the Lone Gene Chronoscope was Mr. William Bradford Huey and Mr. Henry Haslett. Our distinguished guest was the Honorable Hugh D. Scott, Jr., United States representative from Pennsylvania. North, south, east, or west. No other name on a watch means so much as Lone Gene, the world's most honored watch. Actually, Lone Gene watches are sold and serviced in all the capitals of the free world, for the appreciation of things fine and beautiful is universal. Judging by the same high standards, millions of people the world over agree that Lone Gene watches are in every respect worthy of the 10 World Fair Grand Prizes and 28 gold medals which impartial juries of experts have bestowed upon them for elegance and excellence. It was through superior merit that Lone Gene became, in fact, the world's most honored watch. Now, whichever Lone Gene watch you choose to make your own, rest assured, it will bring you in full measure the greater accuracy and longer life for which Lone Gene watches are world honored. Yet, unbelievably, you may buy and own or buy and proudly give a Lone Gene watch for as little as 7150. Lone Gene, the world's most honored watch. Premier product of the Lone Gene Witnor Watch Company since 1866, maker of watches of the highest character. We invite you to join us every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday evening at this same time for the Lone Gene Chronoscope, a television journal of the important issues of the hour, broadcast on behalf of Lone Gene, the world's most honored watch, and Witnor, distinguished companion to the world honored Lone Gene. This is Frank Knight, reminding you that Lone Gene and Witnor watches are sold and serviced from coast to coast by more than 4,000 leading jewelers who proudly display this empire. Agency for Lone Gene Witnor Watch.


Okay, good afternoon folks, Larry Pesavento with your mid-morning update here at TFNN. We are going to take a look at some of these markets. We were sharply lower last night and then the markets came back and taken back half of those losses so far. We got the Dow down slightly, down about 70 S&P down 20 or so, NASDAQ down about 80. Gold has bounced a little bit after the $100 drop in two days in the gold market. So we continued to go lower. Platinum has been interesting because it finally made a price objective down there at 972 that we've been waiting for for quite some time. So those are a few of the things that we're watching here this morning. The currency markets, the U.S. dollar, is still rallying strongly after making that 50% retracement that par at 100 and change. We're up to 103 already. That means the Euro has been selling off and the Euro has, of course, been a beautiful ABCD pattern to the downside and continues to move a little bit lower. Getting pretty close to some major support here in the Euro, down about another 100 S&P down around that 106 and change level. So we'll have to pay close attention to that, but that's come down so quickly. That's an indication that maybe it will even go. The big surprise, of course, last week was the $100 move in gold in two days, folks. That was a huge move. That was the biggest move we've had in gold in, I think, seven years in a short period of time, and that was huge. So it's coming right off of the 78% level at 1975. We thought it was going to get to 1977. Didn't quite get there, but there's still opportunities in between these markets as we're looking at them today. So we'll pay close attention. By the way, I'll be doing a two-hour show for the Money Show out of Florida. That's on Wednesday, and from 11 to 1 o'clock, I'm going to be talking about the patterns, how they're derived, and also artificial intelligence. We're going to be looking at some different markets, answering questions and stuff, so it'll be two hours. It's a free show. You just have to go to moneyshow.com, answering questions, and it'll be fun. And I'll be showing you some of the history of where these numbers come from and how they work. You've probably seen it before, but if you want to see it again, that's your time to see it, because it'll be an interesting show. I'm going to take a break here,<PHONE_NUMBER>.


Why is my lashes falling off?  Delete all of this. Guys, what is up? Welcome to my channel. So for today's video, I'm going to share with you my top five favorite reds for this holiday season. So if you want to see what they are, then just keep watching. Hi, guys. If you're new here, my name is Morgan. I am a product knowledge enthusiast. I just love sharing all my knowledge and thoughts on all of the new makeup with you guys. And for today's video, all of these products are pretty old, but I'm going to talk about my staple reds for the holidays. I have a few different formulas, a few different price points, and I'm a big red lover for the holidays. I don't wear reds really all year round, but when it comes time for the holidays, I love a good red. And I find myself always reaching for the same reds. So I thought I would share with you the top five that I will probably be wearing this season. I know this season is looking a little bit different with the home mask situations. If you're leaving your house, many factors as to why you probably won't be wearing red this season. But I just think it's fun to wear around your house, take some selfies in for the holidays, upload them to Instagram, and I don't know, maybe you're doing something. Anyways, so I'm just going to share with you my top five favorites. We're going to start off with lipsticks, then we're going to go into liquid lipsticks. I'm going to demo them for you and all of that good stuff. So let's get into the first one. So I'm going to start off by using Bossy lip liner from Colourpop. I don't really have a favorite red lip liner, honestly. I just kind of grab whatever. But if you're using a red lipstick, please, please, please use a lip liner. All right, so let's get into my first favorite red lipstick. Now this is in no particular order. I just love all five of these, but we're going to start off with the newest one, I would guess. This is the Charlotte Tilbury Lipstick in Super Starlet. I really, really love this color because it's more of a neutral kind of red shade. It's a little bit more on the deeper side, and I've talked about this color a lot recently just because it's been my current favorite red of the moment. So we're going to try it on just so that you can see it. But it's from the collection that has a beautiful kind of bedazzled top from Charlotte. So I also really love it because of that. So you can see it's kind of a more toned down red. It's a little bit deeper. It's not like a bright pink or cherry kind of red. So I think this one is really appropriate if you're not into really bright lips. It's also the Kissing Formula from Charlotte. So it is very, very moisturizing. It's going to have a bit of shine. That's why you definitely want to make sure you have a lip liner underneath so that it doesn't travel because it is a creamier formula. But this is an extremely comfortable red. It's going to give you a little bit of a pump because it has some shing to it. And it's not going to be too bright. No, it depends on what you would classify as too bright and what you're comfortable with. But I definitely find this to be just like a great classic red. Okay, so the next lipstick is from Chanel.  There's some things here and there I'll pick up, but I'm not so familiar with the line. But I've had this lipstick for years, probably way past its expiration date. This was given to me by my mom and I guess it just has sentimental value to me. But I continue to use it every single year. So it still is one of my favorite reds. And this is the Lipstick in the shade Rebel. It's a Rouge Coco Shine. Okay, so you can see that this color is so much different than the Charlotte Tilbury. This is more of a daytime red for me. It's a sheer formula. It almost is a little bit more orangey, but I love this as a daytime red. So you can see it's really, really shiny on the lips. It's a very sheer formula, but it gives you a red that's still not quite as intense or as opaque compared to that Charlotte Tilbury especially. So if you're looking for something that's more of this sheer kind of wash, really love Rebel from Chanel. All right, these last three are going to be liquid lipsticks. We're going to start off with such an oldie. It's just one of my favorite classic reds. And this is from Kylie Cosmetics. But it is so good, you guys. This is Mary Jo K.  So liquid lipsticks normally are the formula that I go for when I'm wearing reds, especially with the whole mask situation. And while the Kylie formula is kind of drying, it really stays on for a really long time. So I just make sure I moisturize my lips very well. I make sure I don't reapply too much so that my lips don't get crusty. But I find this lipstick to last such a long time. And if you take care of your lips and use it properly and don't build the product too much, it is fine. And the red is just perfect. It almost is more of like a blue red, which I really love. So you can see how much more different it is compared to the other two. A lot more blue and bright. So here's what Mary Jo K from Kylie looks like. I love this one. It's been a while since I've worn it. But if I'm looking for a bit more of a brighter red, this is what I go to. It's extremely long wearing. Wow, I really recommend looking into this one, especially if she's having a sale on her lip product. This is one of her first launches. And it really is one of my absolute favorite reds. Ignore the little bit of staining. As you can imagine, swatching red lips is really, really tough. But let's move on to the fourth one. Again, kind of a very similar red to the Kylie, but I absolutely love it. So this is the Fenty Beauty Stunna Lip Paint in the shade Uncensored. It's a tiny bit deeper than the Kylie shade. And it's not quite so bright and blue base. It's a little bit more deeper for even more of a staple red. This is going to look really great for deeper complexions. Ignore how crazy I kind of applied that. I got a little bit out of hands up here. But how gorgeous is this red? I know they all kind of look the same, but I swear they're different. I mean, they're not that different. They do look the same, but I just love every single one for a different kind of occasion because I am so into makeup. I can tell the difference. This one is a bit more bold red, whereas the Kylie was like cherry bright red. This one is definitely more bold. I absolutely love this one as well. And I do find the formula to be less drying than Kylie's, which is something that you might want to also keep in mind. Find a one. Red is ridiculous to swatch. Oh, my goodness. So this is an affordable option. Fairly new. This is the Colourpop and Mulan collaboration liquid lip. And this is called Strong Chi. This is such a great red. And I don't mind this formula. I think it's really great for the price. It feels more expensive. It's better than the Kylie, honestly, I would say. Now it is sold out online currently, but it is available in a set with a lip loss for $13. And I totally think it's worth it. This is a really great liquid lip that I discovered this year. Now, as you can see clearly from the swatch, it almost has a blurred finish to it. So it's more of a creamy kind of liquid lipstick. It's not going to dry up or harden on your lips, which is why I really love the formula. But that also does take away from the opacity. So if you really want strong, hardcore pigmentation, the Kylie and the Fenty are what's going to give you that. This one is not quite a liquid lipstick, but it's a mixture between a lipstick and almost that powder blur formula. It's really, really gorgeous. So this one is going to be the most comfortable and long wearing red. So it's not going to be the most long wearing, but if you want something that's longer wearing than a lipstick and it's going to be less messy, this is the way that you want to go because it is going to dry down a bit as well. And the color is a little bit softer. It's not quite so intense. So if you like that, then this guy is going to be for you. All right, you guys. So that is all I have for today's video. Those are my top five reds for the holidays. I wanted to give you something with a variety from price points to finishes to textures, all of that. And I really feel like I was able to give you that with this video. I absolutely love all five of these for different reasons. If I had to tell you, though, my number one absolute favorite, I think the Fenty comes out on top because if I want a red lip most of the time, I want to do it right. I want to do it red. I want to do it bold. So this is the perfect bold red lip that I love for this season. So thank you guys so much for watching this video. I hope you guys enjoyed it. If you aren't subscribed to my channel already, I would absolutely love it. If you would consider taking the time to do so. And I will see you guys in the next one. Bye, guys. Have a good one. Oh, wait, I forgot to film my intro. Okay, I'll film the intro after this clip, if that makes sense. Wait.