New America will like to welcome you to our virtual event. The program will begin momentarily. While we are waiting, I want to review a few housekeeping notes. This event is being recorded and a recording will be posted to the New America events page within 48 hours after the event. Attendees will be in listen-only mode and you will not be able to be seen or heard by your fellow attendees or panelists. Therefore, we encourage you to share your comments and questions in the slido box located to the right of the video. Close captioning is available by hovering over the video and clicking CC at the bottom of the video. If you encounter any issues during the event, please contact events at newamerica.org. Thank you for joining us. We will begin momentarily. Welcome everybody. Thanks for joining us in this for this Future Tense event titled, Is China Canceling the Internet? I'm Andres Martinez. I'm the editorial director of Future Tense and a professor of practice at Arizona State University School of Journalism, the Walter Cronkite School. Future Tense, for those of you who haven't been with us before, is a partnership between Arizona State University, New America and Slate Magazine. And we explore the impact of technology on society. And I'm really thrilled for today's conversation, which is so timely and so aligned with the things that we're curious about at Future Tense. And we have two wonderful experts to learn from today. Both happen to be former New America fellows, so it feels like we're all in the family here. Yiling Yu is based in Beijing. And so extra thanks for waking up early where you are to join this conversation. Yiling is a writer based there who is working on a narrative nonfiction book about the Internet in China and has done fantastic reporting for all sorts of locations. He's an economist, a New Yorker, New York Times Magazine, wired, looking at this interplay of technology society in China and the Internet in particular. So really thrilled and lucky to have you. And Daniel Kurtz-Vielen is the editor of Foreign Affairs Magazine, former policy analyst in the State Department Office of Strategic, I'm sorry, policy planning staff, and during his New America fellowship and subsequently he published an amazing book called The China Mission, which is one of my favorite books from pre-pandemic times, which looked at the George Marshall Diplomatic Mission in China. And it's amazing history and it reads like great fiction. And then I just have to point out that I have the magazine here. Your latest issue, which has a lot of great content related to what we're going to be talking about today. And I always carry this around because it just gives me some grovy tasks that I otherwise don't have. Although the writing, I'm sorry. I was wondering that wondering if I was frozen apologies in advance. If we do have some tech issues where we're all zooming in from different places. And it's amazing what these what this technology allows us to do as well.  And I was worried I'm in Cisco City today, E-Lings in Beijing. It looks like Dan is a little bit frozen right now, even though he should have no excuse because he's he's in the U.S. But anyways, let's start, Dan, can you hear me? I can hear you. Can you hear me? Yes.  But I liked the the the idea that what we want to be talking about is sort of at the macro level kind of, you know, there's a lot of talk in places like Washington, particularly in Washington about national competitiveness and, you know, tech powers. And even it even encroaches upon domestic policy, you know, you have this sort of discourse in D.C. that, well, you know, we have to be careful how we regulate the likes of Facebook and and and Google and our tech giants, because, you know, we need these our tech titans to go up against, you know, our Chinese competitors, right? And that this is an argument that I think Silicon Valley has gotten a lot of mileage out of. And people are very worried about competitiveness on, you know, AI or, you know, the base to 5G, you name the technology. There's there are people who who want to sort of treat this as a contest right between these two great tech powers. On the other hand, I also want this conversation to really get beyond that sort of abstract macro, you know, geostrategic talk and look at how people, you know, really experience the Internet and the sort of online culture and whether all of this noise about what may or may not be happening in China or is happening, but how it translates down to sort of like the user's experience and the online community. And because sometimes I don't really have a good handle on that. I can I can read headlines about Jack Ma and Ali Baba or, you know, this particular race on on on what's happening in a particular technology. But I don't really, you know, yielding. I'm really going to look to you to understand, you know, your is the is how different is the Internet experience in China than it was, you know, a couple of years ago with with all of this. And the other part of this is, you know, just throw this out, and then we can get into the conversation and hear from you is, and this sounds a bit silly, but is China cancelling the Internet. The other reason it's sort of playful is the Internet in some ways seems like it's bigger in China. And that might be sort of a very simplistic thing to say. But when I read some of the profiles that you've done, you know, about, you know, celebrities online and the way the fan culture and also the way in which technology was able to allow, you know, an economy to sort of catapult pass certain stages that we in the US. And I feel like in China, at the risk of overgeneralizing, but you know, payment systems and and the way in which, you know, the social media was integrated with retail earlier, all of that seems, you know, and you can push back if I'm wrong, but like more advanced in China and certainly like the relationship that, you know, these streamers have with with the public, how who is in their form or new America fellow and, you know, we did a future tense screening of the People's Republic of Desire.  So that's kind of how we wanted to get into this to think about, you know, taking a lot of the the background context and the big, you know, macro stories that that, you know, future tense readers might be familiar with and kind of being like, Okay, but what's really actually happening. So Dan, let me start off on on the sort of macro national competitiveness. I mean, your latest issue has some really provocative pieces on how we should think about, you know, the relationship with China analogies and distinctions with the old Cold War Soviet Union. There's an interesting article by Bremer talking about, you know, the sort of the the tech competition, but also the fact that we have these these tech companies are now super national. And I guess that's maybe one of the tensions that occurs in China, where maybe the government felt like, Well, we can't allow that to happen. Whereas in the US, the discourse is like, let's not rain the same because we don't want we need to keep up with the Chinese companies. But, you know, how help us frame kind of before we get into the nitty gritty of what's happening on the internet in China, what's happening in the sort of politics in China, in terms of is there kind of a rethink of some of the liberalization of the last few decades that allowed for the growth of tech companies that looked and seen very much like our tech companies, but also they might have afforded people a lot of more autonomy in daily life and their economic life and also maybe like the way they connected with each other online. Yeah, thanks, Andreas. And it's it's it's great to be back at at New America. It was a really, you know, wonderful place to spend time writing my book. And, you know, for all the fellows who have come through, it's kind of provides a really unique platform for just kind of spending time and really kind of getting into something seriously as you're trying to trying to write a book. So I'm happy to be back. I think we may see between our, you know, various freezing zoom screens, a version of tech competition playing out here and we can see whether, you know, New York City or Beijing or Mexico City proves to be able to handle this relatively simple task before we you know, get into quantum computing and AI and, you know, biotech and all that. But, you know, let me I think one thing that's, you know, you see a lot of as you say, Andreas really kind of abstract discussion of tech competition and who's ahead in the tech race in various ways and how each society is is dealing with with with tech issues. And I'm excited to hear from from Yiling and read her book when it's out. Because we, you know, I think too rarely here get really a kind of textured empirical ground up view of that from China. And, you know, there are reasons why that's I think becoming harder in the the geopolitics and diplomacy and obviously COVID has has something to do with this, but the kind of, you know, much more textured and less geopolitically or ideologically driven view is especially valuable. So I'm looking forward to hearing that. But let me try to step back a bit and give some context on the kind of US-China relationship, which, you know, as sure everyone here knows is at a rather fraught and, you know, changing moment, but then also on where things stand in China and how this kind of fits into some of the imperatives there. And I think what is so fascinating and complicated about this set of questions is that both for the relationship that wraps in all these incredibly complicated dynamics and then also for each society and leaders in each society, you know, we all know that we are wrestling with the same set of questions about the role of tech society and how platforms are regulated and and and all those questions. So it wraps together the kind of domestic and the geopolitical and really fascinating ways. When you look at this moment in China, especially for Xi Jinping, who's at this real moment of kind of both kind of sensitivity, but also consolidation of power. And you've seen a number of steps, not just within the tech space over the last several years, which are really about, you know, stamping out rivals and cementing his power and reversing some of the openness that had come to China over the last, in the previous decades. You know, some of that is about the lead-up to the National Party Congress next November, which is the moment when Xi Jinping is aiming to start a third term, people think, and kind of busting through a norm on term instead of in place. There's, you know, the everything from the recent resolution on history, kind of elevating him into the kind of pantheon of Chinese Communist Party leaders. There's a whole host of things that really make this a kind of challenging and interesting moment for for him. And this intersects with tech in a slew of ways. You know, some of this is about going after tycoons who are outspoken, who may, you know, see themselves as a kind of alternate power center, or who senior CCP leadership sees as an alternative power center. Some of it is about the relationship between kind of tech and political action. You know, there's been, I think, over time and future tense has been an important part of this debate at various points, you know, is our various forms of technology going to favor democratization, favor ground up pressure in society, or are they going to be tools of surveillance and authoritarian control? And that's a very live question, obviously, if you're sitting in a government building or a security office in Beijing. So there is that dimension of it. And then, you know, I think it's also worth we're saying that China is reckoning with a lot of the things that we are reckoning with here when it comes to, you know, everything from children and screen time to economic issues and inequality to, you know, how platforms interact with other parts of business society. So there's this, you know, really kind of fascinating complicated swirl. And then, of course, you have the whole geopolitical dimension and the fact of US China competition, which has made, you know, technology one of the the central playing field, central arenas for this competition. I think you have the US CIA director talking about as a main arena for competition rivalry between China and the US. You had, you know, Xi Jinping talking about technological innovation as one of the main battlegrounds of the global playing field. So you have both sides who see it that way. And that, again, also plays out in a whole whole host of different arenas. And that's everything from, you know, the race to be ahead in, you know, 5G or quantum computing and AI. It's about supply chains. And there's obviously been in the US a push to kind of crack down on the access of Chinese companies to US technology and supplies. And then there's also, you know, the question kind of international standards and how each government is interacting with international bodies, formal and informal, that are trying to set international standards on tech. So that's obviously a complicated set of considerations in the fact of growing tension in the US-China relationship makes all of them more complicated to deal with. So I will leave it there and turn to Yi Ling for, I suppose, more texture on the crackdown and what that actually looks like from the ground in Beijing. So I think we've lost Andreas momentarily. Is that Yi Ling, do you see him anywhere? I don't see him. No, Andreas, okay. I can just speak to some of the things you're saying and, you know, how some of the changes are being felt on ground.  But I'll just continue. So I think that actually there's something a little bigger taking place behind the crackdown on the internet. And I think that will help us contextualize what's taking place on the ground, which is I do feel like what has been taking place in the last year in China really starting from, you know, Jack Ma's kind of fall from grace after the anti-IPO was cancelled is a kind of aggressive reining in of all the excesses I think what China proceeds to be is neoliberalism effectively in the sense that when we look at something like the crackdown on, for example, education technology companies, that's a very kind of multi-pronged story that doesn't just have to do with tech, right? I think on one hand it has to do with the fact that it wants to rein in a internet company like New Oriental, which has done immensely well in China over the last decade. On the other hand, I think you know, the crackdown on afterschool tutoring has much more to do with the fact that people are burnt out and that the government can see this kind of extreme inequality within the education system. Even Xi Jinping and his kind of common prosperity speech where he said, you know, we're done with letting some people get rich first. Now we're going to kind of bring about common prosperity. A big part of it is what he called involution, right? Which was a word that sprouted on the online internet where a lot of Chinese people were basically complaining about this kind of excessive competition and burnout that was driving them towards growth with no kind of spiritual meaning or purpose. And so this viral obscure word from like scholarly anthropology suddenly got, finally got picked up in Xi Jinping's speech. And so a lot of the kind of crackdowns are designed to address that. And with the education piece, there's also the kind of ideological piece, right? A lot of it has been or part of it has been about kind of banning foreign teachers and kind of steering away foreign influence. And so that's one part of it as well. Not to mention demographics, right? This kind of like shrinking, aging population. A lot of people don't necessarily see how a crackdown on tutoring has anything to do with demographics, but there's a huge leakage there in the sense that Chinese people increasingly so don't want to have babies. Not one, not to mention three, which is kind of what the government is aggressively pushing now. And a huge part of it is that babies are expensive.  And so a lot of this crackdown is about getting Chinese parents to start having children again. And so I guess the broader point I'm trying to make here is that, you know, when we see something like New Oriental, you know, first education company to do its IPO and the New York Stock Exchange like plummets. And, you know, the whole company is falling apart and swerves to selling vegetables. There have been a whole kind of series of factors that have been, you know, in the making for a long time that have kind of kind of made the final push for for the government to introduce, you know, such a regulation among a whole slew of other ones. Yeah, and so I guess that that's kind of one point that I would make. Andreas. Andreas, are you back? Can you hear me? Yeah. Yes. The content and the internet, I think Mexico City is seriously blown it here, the tech contest here, but I was listening and that was super interesting and any link, I think it's a good reminder to be focused on the fact that this is not just happening in terms of the, you know, the, the consumer internet but it's happening across a broader swath of activities. What happened in the last few weeks, I did want to ask about the case of Peng Shui, the tennis player and that's really I think captured a lot of people's imagination and attention and we saw what the reaction of the World Tennis Association. But in terms of the censorship angle and the way in which, you know, people online relate to a story like that, you know, how does that play into the trends that we've seen recently, or is it just, you know, somewhat separate in the sense that five years ago or just I'm just curious for like your reaction in terms of how you've seen the story play out perhaps in our media that it might be missing something or might be different from, you know, what you're seeing on the ground. Yeah. To be honest, I think, you know, what makes the puncture case so fascinating is a that it has kind of implicated the kind of highest levels of leadership, like, you know, speaking out kind of against sexual harassment has been taking a place for a while now, particularly after 2017 when the feminist movement and the Me Too movement started, you know, taking off here in China, but so the kind of most important and interesting part of it is that it is implicating higher levels of leadership. And then the second part I would say is interesting is that that the WTA is involved right and so that there is huge kind of international attention that is continued to sustain itself and it's going to, you know, implicate the business world and the tennis community more broadly, but, you know, like seeing how things are taking place here, it very much feels like the censorship machine is just going into its usual mode, like it's just playing out what it always does, maybe a little bit more effectively and kind of more quickly than it would have a decade ago or even five years ago, but, you know, it almost feels like it just feels like business as usual, like the thing goes up, it goes up for 20 minutes, then it's scrubbed off all platforms, and then all the keywords are kind of aggressively taken down, you know, everything from like, it's not just like her name, like Takashri and Jong Lee, it's like, you know, you'll have like a cat and mouse game of like users putting down words like Mike Pence and Serena Williams or like the Prime Minister I, which is like a Korean, you know, TV drama and like all of that all related words tennis, you know, will just be taken down and it's very kind of sweeping and aggressive, but it kind of works like it, at least domestically right it just, it disappears from the public conversation, like it's around floating around, you know, people are talking about it and then after a while public amnesia settles in pretty quickly, and the moment passes, at least domestically. I think the challenge here and where that model censorship just does not work as well is in the international kind of community right outside the firewall that kind of like okay we're just going to forget it all happened just simply does not work. And so, the approach there is kind of this like, and I think that's what's a little new, right is this kind of like the presence of like state media, like global times is Hussein like saying well she's totally fine right and like putting out these videos of her like having dinner with her friends. And so that feels a lot clumsier and like ineffective, but it seems like they just don't really have any idea how to deal with it on a kind of international stage but you know, and I think domestically it definitely feels like that's just how things have been dealt with for a while. Right, and I guess if I'm, you know, President Xi Jinping, or you know, the from the Chinese government's position. I would imagine that the reason why this case is doubly fraught is it's coming on the eve of the winter Olympics, I mean pretty much that's that's going to be here before we know it right in February. In terms of the interplay between the domestic scene and this international realm where it's harder to control as you mentioned. This is very inconvenient timing for a case like this to break for the for the for the government. There were probably there were probably already was a fair amount of concern about international media or potential for activism around the Olympics which can be tamping down to some extent by the pandemic and the controls adjacent to that. But do you, when you look forward to the to the Olympics as a flash point. Is there, you know, how does this case play into that and what what do you expect that we might see or not see around the Olympics in terms of people, you know, descent or activism. Some of it may be imported to the extent that one can during a pandemic when they're not allowing a lot of international visitors. I don't foresee any kind of huge changes from like, I don't I certainly don't foresee any type of descent and activism, particularly not from on the ground. But, you know, I do think that there will be like a huge kind of ramping up of security I think that, you know, sensors will go into overdrive. Everything will be sensitive. But, you know, I think the winter Olympics in some ways is just like another just like scaled up version of an important event and what happens during important events is things get scrubbed off a little more kind of aggressively and people who are perceived as kind of like threats will be, you know, silenced. And so I don't think that there is anything particularly special about the winter Olympics, other than that it is an important event and they will do what takes place around important events. Yeah. And just can I can I ask you laying a question about the way the diplomatic boycott is being is being discussed there I mean to what extent is that has that been, has there been a decision to make that a major topic of conversation and how is that being being talked about you know from the external messaging of Chinese government officials there, you know, seem very happy to point out how few countries have so far joined with us and in the boycott so far but I imagine that is also an opportunity to push a certain message domestically so I'm really curious how that looks from your, your vantage there. Yeah, yeah. I mean so far, not really discussed it. You know, I have to like discuss with people more but it isn't this kind of like huge inflammatory subject that people are enraged about. It's kind of almost just like a side note. You know, maybe I'm not an athlete or not like deep in the athletics kind of circle, but I mean, I think that the messaging that at least, you know, Chinese diplomats are putting out and kind of Chinese media is putting out does seem to echo to a certain extent the sentiment that is on the ground which is, I mean there's a pretty funny tweet that someone put out recently where one of the state media folks was like, in this almost like childish like concerned, like teenage lover voice was just like, well we didn't invite you anyway.  So, I do think that it sends important messaging kind of internationally and to the international community though I don't know to what extent like it is really kind of felt or discussed in any great ducks domestically. I just want to remind our audience to that we'd love to have questions from from all of you, I see a couple of come in but you can you can pose a question in the slide box to the right of the video so please, please chime in. And I wanted to quick to ask you something quickly about this in the I hear from yelling that that, you know, there's actually a fair amount of continuity here and, you know, the Chinese government's ability to to control the message and to, you know, police is being talked about online in cases like this, you know, remains pretty formidable, regardless of what we might think. But when she also mentioned the more difficult challenge that maybe they're not as successful and in terms of the international economic and related to that. I'm wondering if you think that we're just going to see some, it's increasingly difficult for Western multinationals to be in China, right on the one hand we're incredibly, you know, the supply chain is there. It's been tried recently but but you know that worse, our economies are so tightly intertwined. And yet on the other hand, particularly in tech space, you've seen a lot of companies withdraw I think LinkedIn was was a was a prominent company that, you know, platform it that it just it couldn't do it. I mean, the Google saga about whether to be in or in China or not given like the way you have to do to be there is is a long story that goes way back. So we've seen the sort of, you know, part of the narrative up until this recent crackdown was that China was going to have its formidable tech space internet that was going to be sort of parallel to ours right behind this firewall. But in terms of like other brands that are more, you know, consumer consumer brands like you know the Nike's and the Coca Cola's of the world. I mean, obviously those companies are are very much still present in China.  There might be more pressure born on entities to withdraw. I mean the World Tennis Association I guess would be an example of this right. So that kind of activism might be present in in and around the Olympics right the sponsors and just going forward like do you think that that this might be part of a decoupling that might occur in terms of our are very close ties with China that's less about at the global level and how that might percolate into worsening ties if we just become more and more divorced on in terms of like, you know, our brands on the in the tech space but but elsewhere as well. It's a it's a great and big question. I mean in some ways I think the kind of dynamics around decoupling and this was became some ways a dimension of official US policy and the word kind of came into common usage during the Trump administration. So these dynamics had been at play for several years before that and they were driven by the imperatives on on both sides or both in the US and China. You know she's been paying several years ago sort of talking about me in China 2025 and driving self-sufficiency in the whole slew of sectors including many tech sectors, the, you know, the attempts to limit, you know, I think quite successfully what most Chinese internet can see and what they, you know what they consume about scandals that might seem to be getting a lot of plain foreign press but beginning much less attention for the average Chinese reader. You know on the US side you had all the tech companies you mentioned struggling to figure out how to operate in both markets and address the, you know, kinds of pressures they were going to get from either consumers or regulators in the US or other other Western markets with the demands that they were facing in China. So all those dynamics were playing out even before you saw decoupling becoming a much more kind of official part of US policy in the in the Trump years. And I think you have again a kind of set of dynamics that are in some ways pushing in other directions so there's clearly going to be some continuing degree of this kind of divide in sectors that are deemed sensitive by one side or the other for for one reason or another. You're also going to see more and more companies just struggling to, you know, balance those two imperatives and that's true of, of tech, most, most notably but you see, you know, Ray Dalio, for example, raised a big new China fund recently and you know he's had to answer questions about the Uyghurs and about Hong Kong and about, you know, variety of other human rights issues that I think we three or four years ago if you were a big investor you just wouldn't have been, you know, he's tried to say look that's not my business or expertise but that's not an answer that in the US context you're able to get away with in the same way and similarly if you're, you know, a clothing manufacturer or an advertiser you similarly kind of have to have something to say about, you know, supply chains in Xinjiang or other issues that are increasing salience. You know, Hollywood would be another example where China is an incredibly important market to Hollywood studios and they've been trying very hard to get in but you've kind of growing attention on some of the self censorship that Hollywood was ordered to in order to find inroads into the market so you have it within the tech space but then also much more broadly and then, you know, probably most, there's most consequential but quite consequentially also on the kind of people-to-people level you know, for a long time there was a pretty deliberate attempt to really promote lots of people-to-people interaction and to encourage the, you know, flow of students back and forth and that has gotten caught up in the swirl of, you know, security concerns and, you know, speculation about whether there are, you know, kind of Chinese spies hiding in graduate departments and concerns about, you know, Chinese American researchers and, you know, you can-surely there are some valid concerns there but as that plays out on the ground it kind of goes to an extreme very, very quickly and I think tends to get caught up in a swirl of, you know, kind of panicked reactions and all of that is, again, just kind of kind of reinforce these dynamics on both sides and obviously the pandemic and the fact that there's been very little travel and especially, you know, with China which, you know, it's worth saying is committed to a strategy that has been very effective but also doesn't offer a clear kind of roadmap out of the pandemic that we're all still, you know, struggling with in different ways right now so that in the, you know, as these geopolitical dynamics play out makes it much harder I think for both sides to have a real sense of what others are thinking and, you know, certainly at the diplomatic level you would have much, much more in the way of exchanges and really kind of serious substantive exchange, you know, five or seven years ago both officially and kind of semi-official and a lot of that has slowed down quite a bit which just, you know, reinforces misperception and miscalculation, whatever else. Yeah and as you know that's an issue of interest and importance to us at Arizona State where we have thousands of Chinese students and, you know, we obviously as part of our mission and selfishly I guess people could point out as part of our overall health of the institution having those exchanges and having international students is really important and you've had a global pandemic and this sort of changing tenor of foreign policy stretch nationals, you know, security talk affect that in some ways and you know that reminds us curious did the your latest issue of foreign affairs also has this poll the back page where you asked dozens of experts whether they agreed or disagreed with the statement that we've become too hostile to China and the what's really interesting about the results is it seems just eyeballing here pretty evenly divided with experts I guess what like 50, 60 experts are asked something in that ballpark and it's pretty evenly divided and I know a couple of years ago you and I were dinner with with president crow of ASU and a couple of people in the room and I think including president crow felt that, you know, Washington had become too enamored of the sort of Cold War framing network and then maybe a lot of people more people in the room then might have said we were we were being too hostile but I suppose recent events might have been giving some ammunition or debating points to people who feel like we need to be more stern or hawkish towards China but then you get into the debates about well what's what how you know is this a self fulfilling prophecy and who's reacting to who's rhetoric and I don't expect you to have like a definitive take but I'm just throwing it out there. No, I mean, I was thinking about that that event we did with with Michael crow the president of Arizona State, who I think said, fairly crisply look, you know, a couple years ago the US government was encouraging me to you know open a you know Chinese language center campus and bring as many students as possible and now, you know, it's like I get threatening letters from the Department of Defense telling me I'm going to lose you know funding for things if if we don't, you know, track these things more carefully which I think just indicates how dramatic and you know market that shift was in a very short amount of time. I think what is really striking about this poll that is in our current issue and on our on our website you can kind of see the full breakdown of all these answers it followed when we did in 2018 or 2019 asking respondents whether Chinese and American national interest were incompatible. And you know not getting at the foreign policy question but at this kind of core interest question. I think what is really striking to me about both these is that while there's really wide variation and you know people on who argue very vehemently and with, you know, high degree of confidence that US policy has become too hostile to China or vice versa it is, you know, not hostile enough. That it really does not break down politically or ideologically among the American respondents in an obvious way so you have people who, you know are kind of traditionally associated with the kind of you know human rights left who are much more focused on Hong Kong or speech issues or or or or Uighurs who have have been part of this turn you also have kind of more traditional defense hawks and and and you know on the flip side you have kind of, you know, progressives who are you know concerned about a new kind of, you know, hard line approach and national security you have kind of people on the right who really just wanted to be a restraint in American foreign policy so it's been kind of scrambled be the politics on the US side in interesting ways. You know, not to mention there certainly versions of this debate playing out. Within within China as well so I think it's a you know the new paradigm is still kind of trying to be defined and part of what we were trying to get out in this recent issue was this idea that, you know, we kind of fall back in these cold war habits and it wasn't meant to be kind of endorsement of the Cold War but an exploration of those dynamics and and how we get into them and because that I think is the kind of muscle memory for lots of people in the the US foreign policy world you know that kind of tends to be kind of the framework through which people see things. And it is it is interesting how, in contrast to the cold war years with the Soviets, I mean, this really is often driven by concerns about technology, technological advantage. You know, I'm, I'm, I was in college back in the you know, Reagan Gorbachev years and, and nobody was worried that Soviet Union was going to sort of out do the, you know, the West when it came to technologies it was, it was, you know, the concern was it was like, raw military, you know, territorial issues and not you know, oh my gosh they're going to outpace us when it comes to artificial intelligence or you know synthetic biology or the things that we talk about in this you know, contest with China in addition to what does feel like a more traditional political context, contest, but healing I do want us to get back to China and and back online. You know we used to talk about like how does this affect people on the street like I want to know how this affects people online, because you were talking about the you know that what we've seen in terms of the changing official attitudes and relationships towards you know, the you know, the online education space that you talked about, you know, we know about the cancellation of the group by IPO that was related to Alibaba, but getting beyond that, more down to the level of, you know, Leo mama, who I think was the name of the person you profile in that great New Yorker piece, I think the headline I'm looking at the title you mama's everyday life and this was a farmer a peasant who was streaming right and became this this internet sensation and I think you know there was this term that you use in the article about broadcast jockeys and there was a sense that you know you could have quite celebrity hood and success and which were translating to commercial success online and people could connect and have these communities and this was also the subject of how who's film and I wonder if, if that kind of, you know, more grass roots if it's the right term, but spontaneous, coming together online around you know, non political issues like that, if that's changed at all, if there's any kind of dampening of that energy on the Chinese internet regardless of what's happening politically between you know Tencent and Alibaba and the Chinese government, like is that trickling down to that kind of ability for us to go online and create community. Definitely I mean I think the way that I would frame it is you know how kind of the bigger picture has kind of trickled down into everyday life and you know in the specific example online celebrity or kind of like online influence. I have started to think of the kind of developmental trajectory of the Chinese internet and kind of three phases. And so if we think about kind of pre 2013 or more kind of like the heady kind of period of the Olympics very optimistic relatively open. But before that, I think of the Chinese internet very much so aside from kind of like a bare bones firewall with the same optimism of as the global net right there's this idea that this was a town hall way more very much like on Twitter was going to like spark a information revolution that people were kind of speaking truth to power. There is a massive train crash and one Joe and 2011 and some of you have said is a journalist flocking to the scene. Very much kind of like relatively under regulated kind of lots of diverse voices on the field and overwhelmingly liberal. So a lot of the kind of influencers of that time were very liberal, kind of like writers who are finally finding the internet as this kind of space they could find themselves. I think a big turning point to I think what we see as the Leo mama kind of period was 2013, where the kind of the government appointed this guy called Louie as the head of the cyberspace administration and he used a phrase which I think really very much characterizes the internet that I know and that I've written about basically up until recently I think that that stage is ended, which is he described it as a spiritual garden, kind of this garden this walled garden, where, you know, inside lots of this kind of flourish as long as it's kind of pruned carefully pruned on the outside of any type of foreign influence. And so this is kind of the internet as we've known it for, you know, the last five or six years where there's no Google no Facebook or like international kind of tech companies have been kicked out one by one, but you know, not only have these copycats emerged as they were called back in the day, but they've kind of taken on a life of their own and so this is that you know the Ali Baba is kind of growing right dances starting to form at this period. And, you know, the idea that you can have a online life that is like extremely integrated into kind of offline presence I think under as you were mentioning earlier right like does the internet seem bigger in China I would say bigger in the sense that it's like so inextricably bound into everyday life right from the kind of leapfrogging of like online payments technology and to like now the fact that everywhere I go I need to show a health code right like it like I can go anywhere really without my phone. And so this is kind of the period where there is a kind of like a lot of innovation and kind of a great flowering of ideas but within these very tightly bound constraints. I would say like that period has definitively maybe come to an end, particularly with the recent set of kind of regulatory policies in that kind of the idea that it's not just kind of political sensitivity that is no longer. Okay, it's really kind of like excessive wealth, kind of spiritual pollution and vulgarity and so there's this like that economic piece that's not okay like if you're a celebrity that's like making too much money or flaunting your wealth that is a no no. And the other thing that is out is that has been previously perceived for a lot more kind of openness and tolerance is stuff like LGBT issues like that used to be kind of like more of a freewheeling space on the internet. But recently I think both as a kind of reaction to LGBT civil society groups and the fear of kind of formation, as well as maybe just like a more kind of conservative patriarchal take on what online space should look like. There's been a clamping down on that as well and so this is the first time where I think it's not just about kind of like walling off like external influence but also like the creation of a very kind of like conservative or much more conservative, much more kind of controlled ideological narrative. And so that's kind of the shift that I see taking place now, just a quick note there like I think a celebrity now who can thrive in this space is this woman called leads it see who's like viral, both in China and across the world for farming like for for kind of like planting her own crops in the 20s countryside. And because she speaks all the right buzzwords, common prosperity, rural revitalization. And she has recently done an interview with CCTV the state media where she said, what I'm going to do is influence youngsters away from being influencers right that's that that's the energy of the moment. That's fascinating. No, no, no, that was that was fascinating. And that's that's what I was wondering about and you've given us a really good understanding that because the platform on which a lot of the streaming happened my understanding is that it started as a gaming platform and is it. I don't know how, you know, it is why why but it's by now pronounced that way. I give it how how internet platforms are changing like barely anyone uses why why now right that was like 2016 and I watched how was brilliant documentary to but now everyone's on doing or question. And those were just burgeoning at that time doing is bite dances. So are they being. Are they waning and influence or is it just that the content is changing. Like you said, you know you have to readjust your content is changing. I think it is. The way you bite dances kind of like political savviness and its ability to survive in this like extremely challenging environment like it's just split itself into two right it's like pulled a Voldemort and there was like doing and tick tock. But it's just it's the content. It's increasingly patriotic. It's increasingly kind of clean.  So yeah, that that's kind of the shift that's taking place. Somebody wrote in a question sent a question. We touched upon this a little bit but it's it's interesting worth. So the question is, if the Chinese government wants to censor foreign influence and culture. Why do they want to participate in the Olympics, if it is such an international event. What's your, your sense of that, like if you're adverse to all these influences and want to retain strong control isn't it, or just sort of opening the Pandora's box or, or is this just sort of a confidence that you can have it both ways you can bring in the world in the Olympics and show what you want to show. And but I think that's that's the where the question is, is had it like, if you want to be so controlling. Why would you want to host the Olympics. I mean, I think there's a long, you know, there's a, there's some great political science work we ran a piece by Don McRoddy and Bill Woolforth earlier this year about why authoritarian states have traditionally been really attached to the Olympics and seeing that as a means of kind of projecting power and, you know, pursuing I think great rival great power rivalry by their means was their phrase. I think in China's case it is a matter of, you know, when it have it both ways and I think you see this in lots of other of other countries as well. There's a, you know, desire to project influence to, you know, it's not a matter of, there's a kind of endless debate about the extent to which there is a China model that that the state is trying to bring to other parts of the world but there's certainly a really concerted influence and this has been, you know, a major part of Xi Jinping's foreign policy over the last several years to project economic and political power, and in the region military power through a variety of means if you look at you know a lot of what the Chinese have done in international organizations within your U.N. organizations and others, Belt and Road, you know, kind of huge investment initiative and infrastructure initiative that has, you know, now spans much of the world so there is this real desire to kind of project that power and the Olympics is a kind of great way to, to highlight that arrest has traditionally been the 2008 Olympics. You know, people might remember as this real kind of important almost, you know, it's pitched us almost this kind of coming out party for for the new China. And so it is an opportunity to kind of show this model and show a degree of pride to the rest of the world and, you know, I think the question is, does the boycott and controversy over whether it's, you know, over H.Y. or others, you know, to what extent does that become the story or is there still a kind of narratives that that much the world will see that will project this kind of pride and strength. I'm curious how that looks from from, you know, your vantage sitting in in Beijing Ealing but I think that's the kind of geopolitics of this question at least. I would agree. I mean I would say that it's not trying to kind of like censor foreign culture and influence kind of as a blanket like all foreign culture and influence like people are, you know, listening to foreign music consuming brands like a kind of in ways that are unprecedented right. I think specifically it's trying to curtail foreign influence that has any like potential to undermine its authority. And so if they think that the Olympics is something that won't then it seems like as sports is allegedly this kind of ideologically agnostic ground, then that's that's why they are deciding to participate. I love that phrase. I do that knows that I'm really interested into thinking about this, you know, the impact of sport and society and politics and I love that phrase that you just use dealing about it being ostensibly ideologically agnostic because ostensibly is a key word there to We're almost out of time unbelievably because it's phone by but I do want to just try to squeeze in one last question from Adam sent in by Adam M because this is really interesting. Given and to both of you, whatever it elicits, given China's domestic control of their digital terrain, how or in what ways is China currently using the internet as a tool of stay craft internationally. I can answer it really, really quickly. I realize we don't have much time but I think you see it in a, you know, I think it's really important to the projection of Chinese influence and you see it in everything from, you know, the fight over shaping tech standards, the the export or surveillance technology, you know, the fight over over over 5G and kind of semiconductor production, the, all of the ways in which, you know, this intersects with military power right so a lot of the questions about you know, what would happen the Taiwan Strait is really about, you know, technology in various ways so you kind of see that when I realized we could spend half an hour talking about each of those but I think you see it running through lots of these different projections of power and in some ways this is a place where you see, you know, the US and China and others you know, Europe's a very important force in some of the tech regulation stuff, you know, kind of trying to project these different visions and working very actively to kind of sell different parts of the world on their, you know, actual technology their approach to standards their approach to to a lot of a lot of these key questions so you see it as both a kind of tool but also an arena. Yeah, I agree with what Dan said though. Only one thing I'd add is just like in terms of shaping the narrative, like in terms of storytelling which I think in comparison to some of the hardware is just a little less kind of sophisticated right it's just like state media on Twitter. And I do think it will become more sophisticated but right like, as of now, like the narrative seems to be another way in which the Internet is trying to I mean they're using the Internet as a form of state craft. This is not exactly high tech but it's where there was this fascinating white paper on democracy that that the that was put out by China in the context of the American summit for democracy and it just is kind of amazing amazing to see this you know, debate playing out both on, you know, on Twitter but also through this you know kind of very traditional form. When I first read this question, in addition to you know debates around things like, like while we're on 5g standards I was also thinking about the sort of, you know, admittedly very, you know, somewhat farcical debates we had around Tiktok and its ownership. In, you know, farcical in the context of like the overall easy politics but but it was, it did connect to this sort of, I think anxiety that that that people outside of China might have at the prospect that some of you know that we might see can you know more and more consumer brands coming in from China and that becoming more of a two way street and you know that we're more accustomed to sort of the default shared tech platforms brands that, you know, being kind of ours being exported to put it to put it crudely.  But I wonder, Dealing, do you think we'll see more Chinese brands platforms coming to our shores or I guess the question is, are we going to see a stifling of innovation as a result of the current situation which is always the debate, you know, we get in the states like, don't over regulate tech companies or this is all going to come to an end. And that's a very big question to end on and we have about the million million dollar question and I always hesitate to prognosticate because some like we tend to be wrong. But I would say yes, in terms of like hardware like yes in terms of what kind of trying to incise is like useful growth I think you know in terms of like sebi conductors and batteries and like electric vehicles I still foresee like a lot of innovation taking place but you know if it's going to be like like dance 2.0 like or the new social media platform, or like a fashion brand, or like, you know, like a film, I think I'm less inclined to think that something innovative and new will happen there. Right. Dan, anything on this or? No, I will. I will. You Ling have a last word on that. Excellent. Well, apologies, I've kept you both a couple of minutes over. I would love to continue talking to you both for a couple of hours but alas, we must let you go and thank you everybody who's tuned into this this is we appreciate your being here and I apologize for our tech difficulties and and and my wife I'm particular I'm really glad that I was the person kicked off and not one of our indispensable experts so I really appreciate you Ling and then you being with us and we'll continue to follow your your writings and publications and can't wait to to read your book you Ling and to read your reporting in the meantime.


okay thank you Anthony and let me thank everybody for coming what's really exciting about today is that we have people from all over the state we have people from down in Bennington in Brattleboro and Newport and St. John's Bay everybody's else so thank you all for coming and I also want to thank the organizations who have helped us put on this function and that's the Vermont AFL-CIO, rural Vermont, the Perg, United Electrical Workers, the Peace and Justice Center, the Sierra Club and our special thanks also to the folks at United we stand who have helped as well and let me begin let me begin by saying in regard to NAFTA that there is a reason why all of the multinational corporations in America are putting millions and millions of dollars into the pro-NAFTA campaign and there is a reason why the handful of billionaire families who control the economics and politics of Mexico are putting an unprecedented 30 million dollars into this campaign to convince the United States Congress to vote for NAFTA and there is a reason why the corporate owned media in America is pushing the NAFTA agreement so hard and that is that the wealthy and the powerful in Canada, in Mexico and in the United States understand that the NAFTA agreement will bring huge profits, increased profits to the big multinational corporations and that obviously is why they are supporting it but on the other hand there's something also interesting and that is that the working people of the United States all over this country understand what NAFTA is about they're standing up against NAFTA and up in Canada our neighbors to North something very interesting happened last week you may have seen it that the political party the Conservatives who pushed the NAFTA agreement down the throats of the Canadian people they suffered the worst electoral defeat in the history of Canada and what you're going to hear today and we're very proud because here today we have not only Dave Bonya from Michigan we have a wonderful speaker guest from Mexico and what he's going to tell you is that the poor people and the farmers and the workers of Mexico understand that this agreement is not in their interest as well so what you have is the rich in all three countries pushing it and the poor and working people opposed to it and the reason that we are opposed to it is not a complicated reason you don't have to have a PhD in economics to understand that American workers and farmers should not be asked to compete against the death desperate in the impoverished people of Mexico who are working for a minimum wage of 58 cents an hour or a manufacturing wage of $2.35 an hour don't kid yourself NAFTA is not about raising wages in Mexico it is about lowering wages in the United States some of you may know that I was down in Mexico with a congressional committee a couple of weeks ago and I must tell you that from an emotional point of view not just an intellectual it was very distressing seeing workers at a general motorist plant in Matamoros Mexico working for a buck and 80 an hour and then right across the road about where the transportation department building is here you saw the shacks where these workers were living in which did not have running water and did not have electricity brought to them by general motors and then we met with a woman and most of the workers there by the way in the plants were women young women and we talked to them there's a woman there was making a buck an hour working for Zina and she broke down in tears as she told us about how difficult it is to raise a family and a buck an hour so the good news and all of this stuff is that American corporations are building state-of-the-art manufacturing plants and spending billions of dollars on that but the bad news is they're building in Mexico they're building it in Asia they're building it all over for cheap labor but they're not building it in Vermont or America and that's what NAFTA basically is all about it's about the deindustrialization of this country I don't have to tell the people here you see what's happening with GE with digital with Johnson controls with the downsizing all over the state 30 years ago one-third of the people in America worked in the decent paying manufacturing sector they made a decent wage they had decent benefits and now what we're talking about it's 17 percent of the people working in manufacturing and what's going on now is that our kids instead of producing real products and making a real wage they're flipping hamburgers for four and a quarter an hour and what NAFTA is all about is that last year over half of the new jobs that were created in America were low-wage temporary jobs and what NAFTA is about is people suffering a decline in their standard of living now some people argue about the amount of jobs job loss that will be associated with NAFTA it is very informative therefore to ask that question to corporate America themselves to go to these people and very interestingly about a year ago there was a poll rope a poll that was published in the Wall Street Journal 450 top CEOs across America and rope percent of these people if NAFTA is passed what do you intend to do in terms of your plants 40 percent of those people who responded said it was very likely or somewhat likely that they would move their plants or some of their plants down to Mexico that's what the corporate executives are saying and also very interestingly and very importantly 24% of the executives said they would use the threat of job loss to Mexico to bargain down the wages of their workers you understand what I'm saying what they're saying what they are saying is well we may not go to Mexico but you know what you know that plant on the other side of town they went and if you don't take a 10 or a 20 percent reduction in your pay that's where go where we're going so sign on the line and be lucky that you have any job at all now some of you may remember that about 12 years ago corporate America under the guise of Reaganomics they came forward and they said remember this they said if you give the rich and the big corporations big tax breaks what they're going to do with those savings is they're going to reinvest in America and they're going to create new jobs remember that's that was a lie and everybody knows everybody knows what Reaganomics was about they took those savings they bought traveling vans they took our jobs to Mexico and all over the world that's what they did with those savings and what they also did is became wealthy and on the Reaganomics tremendous massive transfer of wealth from working people and poor people to the very rich 12 years have come and gone and now they've got a new gimmick and their new gimmick is as they say if you allow the United States to merge economies with Mexico guess what we're going to do for your workers we're going to reinvest and we're going to create all kinds of great jobs for the American working people they lied a dozen years ago and they're lying today the fight there were waging goes beyond after and what it's about is the corporate America has committed economic treason against the working people of our country and what we have got to demand of them is that they claim to be every time there's a war they tell you how patriotic they are and how much they love America well if they love America then maybe they should start reinvesting in this country rather than in Malaysia and in the Philippines and maybe they should start paying workers a living wage rather than 50 cents an hour or a buck an hour to desperate third world people I'm delighted to see so many people here today and I'm delighted very delighted that we have people from all walks of life in the state of Vermont we have many of the people from the unions are working people family farmers the environmental community United we stand and so forth but I want to right now introduce a gentleman who is a very good friend of mine as many of you know you sent me down to Washington as the only independence in the United States Congress a lot of good things to say about either the Democratic or Republican parties and the truth is there's not a whole lot of good things to say but I want to introduce a gentleman who is the third ranking Democrat in the House of Representatives he's the whip his name is Dave Banya and Dave has played an extraordinary leadership role in fighting the NAFTA agreement and I honestly believe that if we are successful in defeating NAFTA it's gonna be a very close vote in the House there is probably no one in America who is more responsible for that victory for working people than Dave Banya so it's a great pleasure to welcome to the state of Vermont Dave Banya from Michigan


Ruuuuuuuuur! Red! Duh-duh-ding-ding-duh-ding-duh-duh-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d... Don't be s***ing, man!  Did you get some Corbin? I'm red. And you can follow us on Instagram and Twitter for more choosing content. It's so choosing! And Facebook, Facebook, Twitter, Twitter account, Ring the Bell, we upload notifications in the squad. Bang! videos because we post them every single day. It's true. In case you didn't know that. Today we're doing something different. We've been asked to do this for a while. We are going to be naming our top 10 films you should recommend to an American. And so this is specifically an American because we are Americans and that's all we can speak towards. Yeah. Obviously different countries, Germany, England, Brazil, different tastes. I don't know what their cinema is like. This is just for an American who has never ever seen anything out of India. This is our top 10 recommendations. These aren't even our favorite films, even though I'm sure they're films we both like obviously, or as we wouldn't be recommending it. But I think most of it has to do with runtime is a big thing if you're recommending to an American because most of our films are an hour and a half to two hours tops. That's where most of our films, unless it's a Nolan film or an Avengers film, those are big epics. Or Martin Scorsese because he's crazy. Or Martin Scorsese. And so this is just for that. Also obviously there's many others that you could recommend. Also people's tastes are different. So what one person will like others won't. We kind of came up with a general list of things to get if you have an American friend or American family that aren't familiar with anything out of India. These are films that we think that you can recommend that they will enjoy and get them interested into Indian cinema. So that being said, number 10, Rick, what's yours? All right. And this was I don't know about you. Was this easy for you to make a 10 or was this hard for you to make a 10? It was hard. Yeah, it was really I had a 21 and then I stopped. There's a lot. There's a lot that you can recommend. Yeah, so for example, I will give believe it or not because my number 10, all of these I have the name of it and then I have a sentence and it all begins with like the game changer for me. So these are like because the objective for this is to show people the quality of stuff coming out of India and let their minds be blown away like we have been with Oh, I did not know that I had the stereotype in my head about Indian cinema about Bollywood and I had no idea. So I this one. I have an honorable mention later, but my number 10 is header. Gotcha. And it's for me, the game changer when it comes to proving that Hollywood and England aren't the only place where Shakespeare can be adapted for the screen better than anywhere else on earth. Because header is for me the best adaptation of Hamlet I've ever seen. I agree with you. It's actually not on my list, believe it or not, because I think you can only recommend it to a specific type of American. And that's why I almost didn't include it but left it because you're absolutely right. People who don't care about Shakespeare and don't know Hamlet and don't understand the slightest thing about the tensions that have gone on with the Kashmiri situation. They're not going to understand it. But I had if you like if you have a friend who likes like artsy films Oscar type thing, they'll probably be into it. And so yeah, like I said, there's a ton. It just depends on their tastes. Some people like big action. Some people like drama. Some people like all this kind of stuff. So there's many different ways. My 10 is actually Uri. Because I won we that was one of the first films we saw in India in theaters here. And I think in terms of a film that's a military film, one, we can relate to military films to it's just a really good military film. It's entertaining all the way through. And it shows because a lot of people and I can tell you this one experience that I've asked. Most people think stuff coming out of India, Bollywood is just songs and dance. Right. So you show them something that is comparable to what it was those films that came out with to dark. No. What's his name from? I just want to get I just want to get another look at you. What's his name from a star, a star is born. Male the male. What's his name?  Yeah, Bradley Cooper. Anyway, Bradley Cooper. Thank you. That film he did a few years ago, the military one, like with a sniper. Yes. Or like Hurt Locker. So I think that film is just as good as those films. Absolutely agree. I think it could be an immediate for your people that like action. I think that could be one that you could recommend almost immediately. I absolutely agree with you. It is for me. I include it like there's people who watch military films on Memorial Day weekend here. Yeah, where he is in my list of those kinds of films. But interestingly, it's not on my top 10 either. Yeah, exactly. You're nine. It was in my top 20. It was in my top 20. So my number nine, Gangs of Wasp, which is both one and two. I their one film. For me, the game changer, when it comes to breaking the stereotypes Americans have that India can't produce something as magnificent as the Godfather or Scarface. You want to be proven wrong? Go watch Gangs of Wasp. Once again, I agree. It's not on my list. And you know how much I love that film. It's not in your top 10 because it's five and a half hours long. That's why Wow. Yeah, see, I think I think if you let people know, I think if I told my friends here who like my my buddy Rich loves loves movies love Scarface. I would let him know I'd say, okay, dude, you need to go in for the long haul. This thing is fricking long. Allow it to be long. Watch it over a couple treat it like a mini series. Well, that's why I just they watch it because they used to have it as a mini series here. They released it as a mini series like a six part mini series on Netflix or some streaming service. Why they took that off? Because if I'm shocked, it's not in your top 10. It's because of the length. You know how much I love that film. Oh, I love that film. And it's one of my favorites. But in terms of if I I would actually recommend if I was to recommend it, I'd be like, watch the second one, because you know that one's my favorite. Yeah.  And here's the thing. I think if you do that and they go through it, if they get through it, you then can roll up your sleeves and go, okay, now you can watch one gone. So yeah, but once again, it all depends on tastes. I think they would love it if they got down to sit to it. But I think the runtime would intimidate people. That's why it's not on my list. My nine is Kahani. That's can't this is great. I knew you and I would come up with different choices. Yeah. Well, well, yours is turning out to be just my favorites list. But most of mine, like I said, had to do with runtime, most of them. And so this is a very good suspense thriller type thing with great acting and great story and it teaches you a little bit about Indian culture. I thought it was just a really good choice. The runtime's not too bad. And so that's that's why it's there. I think I think most Americans would enjoy that film. Go ahead. I agree. Number eight, Kumballanjee nights. It's a game changer. Is it on your top 10? Yeah, it's all right. Yeah, come on. It's it's the game changer. When it comes to breaking the stereotypes Americans have about every film in India having to come out of Bollywood, and that regional cinema can produce Oscar level quality. Yeah, it's actually seven for mine as well. I haven't exactly at I mean, eight. That's what I meant. The only reason it's not higher is because of the slowness of the front of it. And so but I I think you can recommend to anybody as if they'll sit down and watch it, I think they'll enjoy it. But that's the reason it's not at one because once again, you know how much I love that film is just because of the the slowness of the front if they don't like drama, like, like dialogue like we like, I they might get bored. But then obviously, once they get to the end, they'll pay off will be. And I also think I also think that you kind of do almost do a disservice to it by by not being if you tried to make it first, I think it's almost in the same way that like to get to that area, you actually, you know, you don't go directly there, you come through, I think it's good to be introduced to Indian cinema first with something more Americanized before you enter into that region and understand cultural things. So yeah, I think it teaches them about Kerala and how beautiful that area is, obviously, because that that's a whole character in of itself in that. Absolutely. So year seven. PK. Interesting. For me, and I have a very special place in my heart for PK that not everybody's gonna have. But for me, it's the game changer when it comes to breaking the stereotypes Americans believe about about India being a third world country and Indians having antiquated or bigoted world views. That was one of the most beautiful things for me was that this was presenting this innocent character who was looking at all of the different belief systems. And you have this relationship between an Indian woman and a Pakistani man. And it really touched on topics that I think a lot of Americans would look at and go, Oh, so they're not the stereotypical, antiquated, you know, way behind us people, they actually are, they're progressive in the way that they think and ponder things. They don't just follow these traditions mindlessly. Yeah, that one's not on mine. But I agree with you. It's just they some of the acting in there is what why I wouldn't recommend it before the ones I have here. Okay. Because it's not American style acting a lot of times in it. But I can see there are people that would love that film in terms of America because we love that film as well.  But my eight or seven is Swades. Really? Look at you, Corbin Miles. One, I enjoyed American audience. I enjoyed that film a lot. As you know, I Yeah, I wish the ending was different, as you know, but I enjoyed that film. I think if you want to be introduced to Bollywood, you have to be into Sushabh Rukh Khan, because he basically is Bollywood. Now, now you do you do realize that's a three and a half hour runtime, my friend. Yeah, I do. Okay, I was thinking I was like, but no gangs of wasps. Yeah, I did forget about the runtime. Was it really three and a half hours? Yeah. Was it really? I don't remember that. Half hours long. No, then maybe not. But anyways, what I was saying, I you have to introduce an American to Shabh Rukh Khan. And so you would choose would you choose that over say like my name is Khan for an introduction to SRK? Yeah. Wow, not me. But because nice not just SRK, this is India as a whole. And so it explains a lot of the culture as well. True. Oh, and I love I love Swadesh. I love that. That's why it's there. I didn't realize it was three and a half hours. So I might actually nix that. But I thought it was about two and a half. I don't remember it being three and a half. Anyways, but whatever. Go Rick. What's your six? Number six, Rossi. Okay. Interesting. Yeah, for me, that's a game changer. When it comes to breaking stereotypes that Americans believe about Pakistan and India. Okay. I really loved aside from come on. It's love. We love that director. We love the actors in that especially Alia. And I I what I was most impressed by because it was one of the earlier films we saw in Vicky was how much it yeah it and Vic of course that's what I mean. I mean, there's several people in there that it's Vicky's in there. The it it really gave a different perspective. In terms of a lot of a lot of Americans don't realize they just think of Pakistan as like this terrorist place that was its own country forever. And they're just enemies of India and enemies of the West. They do not realize as we didn't. This was once one country and there are deep rooted things that go much, much deeper than just the stereotypes you see on your news at night here in America. And I really feel open minded. People would look at this and go, Oh, maybe I need to take a closer look at I didn't even realize that they were one country. What what did happen? I think it could really draw people into a realization of the situation there. Interesting. So my six is English v English. Wow, it's at six. It's at six because I think this film is actually really good to recommend to like your the mother's American moms, female like because it's just such an enjoyable film. You'll have a smile on your face the entire time. Yeah, you you don't, you don't you're not the kind of guy who puts certain films into a chick flick category, are you some there are some but no, no, not fully. I love chick flicks. Not all chick flicks. I'm chick flick. Anyway, but I think that's like this. Some not all. But like I said, everybody is different tastes. But this I think has is one of the most enjoyable films we've watched. I think just because of how lovely Shredevi is and how one it's also you can just relate to it because it's in America. And so you can you can easily relate to I think it would give people more empathy for immigrants coming to America as well. And also it's just adorable. It's just an adorable film. Yep. Ever since we watched it. Go ahead. Five. Number five. I think this is the game changer when it comes to breaking stereotypes Americans believe about Indian historic epics. Yeah, bottom of our order must have Nani. That was I had to go between the two. And for me, it was because we were first introduced to Padma bot and I think that that informed our appreciation of pastrami must have Nani. Yep. And for those people don't know what pastrami must have Nani is I'm sorry. Yeah, it's budgetary. It's been called pastrami must have Nani since day one. Yeah, I agree. Those are really good films that I think a lot of people would really, really enjoy and get them introduced to the big Bollywood epics. Yeah, and to the beauty of the directorial imagery of Sunday, we live on salad. A ton of actors. Of course. My five is gully boy. I think it's actually really really digest. Yeah, we have totally different lists. Yeah, you have like most years are actually were on my top 10 favorites of most of the ones you had are just my personal favorites. Gully boy I think is a really, really good and easily digestible because like a lot of people have compared to eight miles a similar story to an eight mile rap is a huge thing in America and wouldn't know that it's a huge thing in India. Yeah, at all you get to introduce them to Alia, Ranveer. What's her name? What's her name? Who? From Margarito. I don't know why I'm forgetting her name. Really? That's awesome. I don't know. Cocky, thank you.  Obviously, that's beautifully directed by Zoya. Somebody else. Somebody else you've forgotten. Yeah. Always forget BJ Ross. Anyways, but I think that's I think most Americans just like we were it was our first film in theaters of an Indian film and how impressed we were. Yeah, yeah, it's it's one of those I think most Americans could easily digest and enjoy. All right, number four. Yep. Pink. Can I introduce Amitabh Bachchan? I like it. Yep. The game changer when it comes to breaking the stereotypes Americans believe about Indian worldviews. Remember, we mentioned how much it was. We looked at it were like, dang, they were talking about this issue before we were. Yep. And it introduces you to the gravitas of Amitabh Bachchan and top. And and it introduces you as we were to Topsy Pinot. Yeah. See, I agree. That's such a good film. My four is Massan. I think that film is just flawless. And it's a short runtime. And it's one it's obviously written by on your right, Kashi up. And so he writes stuff like we've told like, it's just very Western style. Yes. And so I think it's the quality of it is just so good of that film. I could have put Udan here as well. Yeah, I thought might those two are interchangeable for me. You could you could recommend Udan you could recommend Massan. Both of them I think people would really really enjoy just because it's just the films are so so good. I can't disagree with you. I think that's an absolutely true three. My three is English English. Nice. Which is for me the game changer when it comes to breaking story of types Americans believe about Indian romcoms. Just a happy good feel. And I think that would be amazing to you know, something even as seemingly simple as that scene where she's in the coffee shop in New York. It's one of those things that can help people recognize, Hey, I need to be a little bit more compassionate and understanding. Yeah, and recognize, you know, we we're kind of dumb over here. We speak one language everybody else in the world speaks multiple languages. And and and it's it's an introduction to the beautiful Shredevi. So I love English English. It's in my top three of the first movies I would say to anybody getting introduced to Indian cinema, please watch English English. My three is ugly. Almost the same reason as Massan and Udan. It's I think that film was brilliant. And I think it's just wow. Yeah, I love that film. So would you so you well, I don't know, we'll see what goes on because there was another film in the same category that I was really debating. It's in my top 20. And I was wanting to put it in there because I thought and it was ramen rug of 2.0. Yeah. And then that was that was an honorable mention, basically. I think ugly as a film. And I think we said this interview, I liked the film of ugly more. I think more performances of sure ramen rug up for obviously incredible. I think they're both great films. So it's really dealer's choice. But I think the film of ugly is just almost flawless. And it's just it shows him that Oh, this the way India makes these films. What? Yeah, I agree. So to take what Rick says, it's the game changer in the crime thriller. What's your my two is the lunchbox. Okay. It's for me the game changer. When it comes to breaking the stereotypes Americans believe about Indian actors. Gotcha. If I was to if someone were to say to me, you know, if I was going to introduce this to somebody who I knew loved acting and loved actors, and hadn't been introduced to Indian cinema, I would want them to see the effortless beauty that is Irfan in the lunchbox. That's actually my number one is the lunchbox. I think, just like you, that's actually what I recommend. Like when we did that 51, I recommended almost every single person on that video to watch the lunchbox multiple of them have so far. And they've all said they've loved it. And so that's not it's such a short film. It shows the acting quality of multiple people. Yeah, fun. Oh, Oz. Yes, absolutely. And forgive me. I'm not remembering the actress who's who's opposite but she's magnificent as well. The direction is magnificent. So that's always the first one I recommend. But so there's one left for each of us. So what's your number one, Rick? Well, what would you what's your number two? I miss. Oh, really? Yeah. I think introduced introduced to the Western audience like why there's you bring that like way up at the front. Well, of course, it depends on their taste. If they if they're if they're into like romcoms, I'm not going to be like, Hey, watch on this. But actually, it's it's a really good love story. But it cannibalism. But it depends on obviously their tastes. And so if they're if they're not just into those types of films and they're into like, if they really liked what just one best picture? Parasite. Wow, you are really wow. I have dad brain right now. If they're like, if they really enjoyed that film and films like that, I have no doubt that they would love one. It's it's short. It's really short. Yep. And it's, it's just a fun story.  And I think everybody can. Like I said, most of my exception of suede's are all about the runtime for an introduction. I don't think you could, like I said, I didn't realize suede's was that long. I might nix that. But like just a Western audience is very lazy. They get bored very fast. And so you can't just throw them into something that's a lagoon. And so those films that all have high quality and hot high quality acting, high quality writing. Yeah, my list. So what's your number one? Belly boy. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Because it was it was for me, the game changer when it came to breaking the stereotypes I had and I think any American would have about Indian cinema period. Yeah, it's it is it's the door that opened up the world and the universe. And I can't imagine it. Now, I would interchangeably, it would depend. So like, for example, if I was talking to somebody whose mindset was not connected to contemporary hip hop, the rap world, if they're like, way, way beyond thinking like a millennial or thinking in the 21st century, and they're very, very old school in their life, I wouldn't make gully boy first. I put the lunchbox ahead of that or English English. Those are my top three. But nine times out of 10, when somebody says to me, I've never seen Indian cinema. What should I watch gully boy? I'm surprised Amos wasn't on your on your on your thing. There's only there's only one reason because it was in my top. It was in my top 20. There's only one reason as I looked at my list. I thought, okay, I absolutely want to have something that's representing regional. All the other ones are introductions to legends either in direction, or acting or writing. And I can't replace these legends that have this cornucopia of other stuff that an American would go, I love that. What else have they done? Because if you introduce them to Amos, they're going to say, give me more. I'm going to be like, I've never seen anything else out of the sum. And that director's done two films. I have nothing else from that region to give you. But whereas I'm more region, you could just give him a no, I know, but that was my own. That was my only reason. Whereas regionally, you know, the game changer about regional cinema being able to produce Oscar level stuff was come along tonight. So we've seen several films from that region that I can then get off you like that. Let me give you this. And then Oh, you like that? Well, let me introduce you to this one over here in the northeast of India. That's where I would bring in Amos. Yeah. Well, obviously, there's almost 20 films that you could easily recommend that we've seen. Yes, only seen like 85 films. And so obviously, there's a ton. And there's more than we listed here. Obviously, we're not saying this is the only ones you can recommend. These are the only ones that we've seen that and of we had to narrow it down to a top 10 list. So there's actually a bunch in that testament to you guys to that you've shown us so much good stuff that we think Americans can easily digest. So I hope you enjoyed that. I hope it helped you out. Hope if you have an American friend that you can start introducing them to some Indian cinema.


You guys scored just two runs in those final two games against Tampa come back and scored 28 in a three game sweep against Toronto How important was it for the bats to bounce back quickly and like that? Yeah, I mean extremely important Just playing good baseball winning games bounce back after a series like that and come back and win a series. So that's some some rain and some up and down but Great series and in that first inning your grand slam the big blow in this game How satisfying was that trip around the bases knowing what you've been dealing with of late? It was great And put us up. I mean they kind of got off to an early start They got that one-home run in the first inning so to come back and get some runs for for happer. That's big Just get him comfortable and get him rolling You know the question we always ask when we see a guy start to break out is okay Is something going right is something changing a home run yesterday a grand slam today off of a lefty today as well Do you feel like you found something and are turning a corner? Yeah, I mean it's it's a step in the right direction. We just got to keep it going now. That's that's the only thing keep it going All right. Thanks a lot. Thanks, man


This time of year everything is coming up roses at area flower shops as they prepare for Valentine's Day. Josh Peterson shows us how it's all hands on deck for the big holiday. There are many ways to say I love you. Some do it through cards and candies, while others inflate their way to their lover's heart. But for many it's done through flowers, and this time of year roses are the red hot item. It really is just the traditional thing that everyone thinks of for Valentine's Day. I guess the red rose is symbolic of love, and so that's what everyone feels like they need to get for their special someone. Red roses tend to be the traditional Valentine trademark, and as you can see here inside this cooler, many people are giving that traditional token of love to their sweetheart. But if roses aren't your thing, floral designers can help you find that special way to show your love. We have all kinds of different colored flowers and different styles of flowers, but we also have a ton of different blooming plants and green plants. We have boxes of chocolates. We have balloons. We have all sorts of different little gift items. For Amy, who owns Netser Floral in Bemidji, her business depends on a successful Valentine's Day. Between Valentine's and Mother's Day, it is the two most important floral holidays, obviously. It's where we get, you know, the most orders coming in, and we're swamped. Over the past couple of days, extra hands were hired to help with taking orders, arranging, and delivering. But while it's a crazy few days, it's a labor of love. It's fun being able to bring, when people come in with unique requests or special things they want, being able to bring their vision to life and, you know, help them to have a special holiday. As the clock ticks closer to the big day, the work will continue for extended hours, working to help everyone spread the love. In Bemidji, Josh Peterson, Lakeland News. Many floral shops around the Lakeland viewing area will have extended hours through Valentine's Day, but many say time is running out if you want to place that special Valentine's order. If you enjoyed this segment of Lakeland News, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to Lakeland PBS.


Hello everybody, E here, E here. Welcome back to another book review. Today we're talking about another book that I listened to on scribe and that has really dug this book. So for those of you who like to get in here, feel, see, hear my feelings and get out, I definitely recommend this book. It is an erotic thriller, kind of light on the sex, but very heavy on the sexual tension, which is how I prefer my erotic thrillers or erotic anything, really. And the payoff at the end, I don't want to build this up as something where you're waiting this entire time for two people to have sex, or three people, or four people, or whatever, and that be the payoff. The payoff is something completely different, and it is amazing for it because I did not expect it. The story follows an actress named Kira, who is going to be doing a play with this infamous director Malcolm and Malcolm's girlfriend, Joanne has very, very, very interesting feelings on this whole thing. It's not really a love triangle because I don't think there's any love in this book whatsoever. There's a lot of neuroses. There is a lot of sexual tension, like I said, and that's the best part of the book is watching these characters interact and not knowing when they're going to hit the bedroom, or if they're going to hit the bedroom, that kind of thing. There is another character, but I'm about three weeks out from listening to this book, and I can't remember what the guy's name is.  That person to me felt a bit inconsequential, but that would be my only criticism. I loved the book as a whole, really. The character work is fantastic. I really enjoyed being inside Kira's head, but I always found myself wanting to get back to Joanne. I hope that's right. It's not Joanna. Anyways, I think it's Joanne. Joanne's mind was an absolute pleasure to be inside. I loved how messed up she was. That's the best way I can put it, and her conflicting thoughts about Malcolm, and especially the way she thinks about Kira. The entire book, I thought we were going to someplace completely different. My experience with erotic thrillers is very, very limited, and that's an overstatement, or understatement. It's very, very limited. I think the last one that I read was almost, I don't know, maybe seven years ago, which was The Girl in apartment 6E, which I loved. I ended up hating. I got the first book, Five Stars. I got the second one, One Star. That's how bad this, and I never did read the third book. Funny because it's called Do Not Disturb, and I remember, I think either in my review where I was talking to somebody, I said, don't worry, I'm not going to disturb it. It's going to stay unbought. But anyways, that's completely different author. Fargo does a tremendous job with a sleight of hand, with making you think she is heading one place and she's not actually going there. The audiobook is absolutely fantastic. So if you have subscribed, or even if you have audible, any one of those things, wherever you can find the audiobook, definitely check that out. I don't know how it reads whatsoever. I do not own a copy. I'm going to try and unfuck that very, very soon. But it's one of those, one of these books that I did not expect to like it as much as I did, and I don't know why. I guess because the cover looks like an erotic thriller. I've never been a huge fan of erotica, but this was done right. There was that sexual tension that I love so much, one of the things that I love so much about you by Caroline Kepnes, and I'm not comparing these two books whatsoever. Completely different monsters here.  I much prefer the lead up to two characters having sex, all that tension. I much prefer that than actually seeing the actual act described or whatever. I'm definitely not approved. If you've read my work, you know I'm definitely not approved. But with this one, it was so well done, handled so perfectly. The pitch, the tone, the atmosphere, all of it is so good, and I had no idea where there was those heading. And then I read the last bit. I read the denowment, denouement, whatever, I'm sure Patrick will let me down there in the doobly-doo. I got to the end of the book and I was blown away. Easily in my top 20 books of the year, certainly my favorite audio book up until this point. So have you read Tempor by Lane Fargo? Please let me know down there in the doobly-doo whether or not you loved it, whether or not you hated it. And if you hated it, please tell me why you hated it. This has been happening a lot and I want to continue this on. People who hated the book are telling me, like my friend Richard, I hated Ghost Wall and he recommended me my sister, my serial killer's sister, whatever it was. If you have a book like this, knowing what you've heard me say in this review, what I like and what I don't like, definitely say, okay, I hated this one, I think this book did it better. Definitely do that. No spoilers, of course. But yeah, leave all those kind of comments down there in the doobly-doo and that's where I'll see you. I did not mean to make that wrong. Anyways, but until next time, I have been E, you've been E, this has been another book review. I'll talk to you guys later. Bye-bye!


In September of 2010, I was in Kandus, Afghanistan. I was on a mission with 10th Mountain. I was tasked with clearing a hilltop for landmines. I was clearing it with my teammate, and I was on the corner of the hilltop when I stepped on a landmine. When I kind of got oriented back to where I was, I noticed that I was missing my left foot. When I got to Bethesda, I found out that I was missing my heel on my right foot. The doctors gave me a 50-50 chance of walking pain-free on my right foot, and they would have to do bone grafts and skin grafts and muscle grafts to make a heel for me. And they said, even then, it might not hold up. So I opted to have my right leg amputated right away. That way, my recovery time and stuff was a lot faster. My daughter was born 12 days before I got hurt, so my whole reasoning behind getting back and getting up and walking was to beat my daughter to walking. So that was kind of basing my recovery, and that's why I progressed a lot faster through my recovery. I have to switch out to my running legs now to actually keep up with her. I'm still the same person. I do the same stuff I did before I got hurt, and I'm going to continue doing the same stuff I did before I got hurt. Career Games is bringing people with the same injuries or like injuries with you that can help you with your process of recovery mentally and physically. It's given me a competitive spirit, I guess, you know, getting back, competing again in sports. I mean, just training constantly keeps you in shape. And with my amputations and my disability, you know, I'm going to have to be in shape pretty much the rest of my life to help me with my day-to-day routines.


Baxter Elementary started the new school year this week with a new principal. Dr. Tammy Stelmach joined the staff after serving in public education for over 29 years. She was previously a middle school assistant principal and served as the assistant principal at Riverside Elementary in the Brainerd School District. She's coached volleyball, basketball, track and softball and has been involved with various mentor and service programs. I am very excited to be at Baxter Elementary School this school year and I'm excited because the staff are amazing and the staff are excited and I just look forward to all of the opportunities that we have to offer the students and our family and the staff again here have been absolutely amazing and I couldn't be happier to be here. Staff at Baxter Elementary is looking forward to a good school year as well as some new programs they have planned. This year the elementary school is focusing on kindness and with that implementing a new initiative called the Baxter Kindness Project. They're kicking off the program schoolwide on October 1st. Our staff development team started it last spring and we've been working on it this summer and we're going to focus on three main areas which are unity, random acts of kindness and gratitude. So each trimester will be focusing in on those doing fun monthly projects with staff and students and I think the kids are going to enjoy it and I'm excited about it too. The school welcomed around 525 students back to the school on the first day of the fall session which started on Tuesday, day after Labor Day as it always does. If you enjoyed this segment of Lakeland News please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to Lakeland PBS.


The paper argues that bias correction, BC, is often used in an invalid way in climate change impact studies, leading to increased agreement with observations but not necessarily providing a satisfactory physical justification. The authors propose that the most promising strategy for improved future global and regional circulation model simulations is the increase in model resolution to the convection permitting scale in combination with ensemble predictions, based on sophisticated approaches for ensemble perturbation. They advocate communicating the entire uncertainty range associated with climate change predictions, openly to stimulate a lively discussion on bias correction among the atmospheric and hydrological community, and end users of climate change impact studies. This article was authored by J. Liebert, K. Warksage, V. Wolfmeier, and others. We are article.tv, links in the description below.