So thank you all. This is really meant to be a conversation among these three experts around some of the questions and issues that Dr. Fauci touched on towards the end of his presentation, which is, how do we think in a strategic and long-term way about guaranteeing that there is a robust engagement by the private sector over the long term in bringing forward new discoveries in developing new vaccines and also being present in the production and distribution side of things. And these are complicated and difficult issues. And we'll hear about many of the competing tensions around guaranteeing that there are finances at the front and back and guaranteeing that there's sufficient incentives, guaranteeing that there's enough of a mix between the profit considerations and the considerations around equity, high volume, low cost access. We know that partnerships is the broad frame in which these relationships over the long term are sorted out. And we know there are many other issues that surface with respect to defining what your goals are, looking to the future with some specificity as to what the products should look like, preserving public investment at the early phase in the back phase, talking about quality and the like. We want to bring this discussion back to the question of US leadership and policy, because ultimately we're trying today to think about the role in the policy environment here in Washington in trying to guarantee the stability and the robustness and vitality of private sector engagement in this area as we look forward. Margie, I'd like to ask you to kick things off with a few minutes. We'll go Margie, Julie, and Gina with opening remarks, and then we'll carry forward a conversation and we'll ask you to join us. So welcome and thank you. Great. Thanks, Steve. A great introduction. I think you covered everything I was going to say. So maybe I'll turn to Julie. Just kidding. When I thought about what perspective do I answer the question that Steve posed, how do we assure a robust market for vaccines and really have the incentives that the private sector needs to participate in that market? I thought, what perspective do I come at this from, given my history? And I thought of the Joni Mitchell song I've looked at life from both sides now, spending 26 years with a pharmaceutical company and running global vaccine business and now being the CEO of a product development partnership focused on coming up with an HIV vaccines. But fortunately, I come to the same answer looking through both of those lenses. The only way, as Tony clearly stated in the Q&A session, to address this is public-private partnerships. And each sector has an absolutely critical role. And I'll focus more on what the private sector needs. But clearly, the public sector provides the funding, provides the funding, upfront research and development to remove that risk, which is so critically important when you're talking about diseases for the developing world because to ask a private company to invest R&D dollars, especially with a tough economic times and financial situation that most participants in the industry have found themselves in, to ask them to take on that risk, especially before you have proof of concept, is a very difficult value proposition. So the public funding that's available to support that research, the NIH funding, the funding that comes to organizations like IAVI and other product development partnerships addressing these diseases of the developing world, we're able to channel that to various researchers, including pharma vaccine biotech companies, to help support that early research and remove that risk. Also critically important then is a market being available because to make the subsequent investment decisions, private industry needs to know when they get to the back end, should they get to the back end of that development cycle and introduce a vaccine that somebody's actually going to fund it. And certainly there's no guarantees, there'll be competition and that's all expected, the industry knows how to deal with that. But to not know that when you get to the end of a development cycle where you may have invested hundreds of millions or well over a billion dollars, that funding will be available for that vaccine, it's just not something that's going to cut it. And so knowing through organizations like GAVI, knowing through the funding that comes from governments like the US as well as foundations like Gates Foundation, knowing that funding is available overcomes the second critical hurdle. Clearly then, private industry is absolutely essential as Tony said, I love the analogy to his daughter, I don't know why I didn't say his wife, I know he's happily married, but anyway. That was a great answer and I was pleased to hear it. And when you think about why is that true, there really is no broad-based vaccine that's come from anywhere other than an industry source and in many cases a public-private partnership. When you think about all the tools needed to get through that R&D process, whether you're talking about some of the game-changing technologies like sequencing, high throughput screening, whether you're talking about the bioprocess development to actually come up with a way to make that vaccine and then to be able to scale it up to produce hundreds of millions of doses a year, clearly you need industry to do that. Also to introduce vaccines, to be able to figure out what is the right product profile and working through partners, organizations like GAVI, WHO, SAGE, what's the right presentation of that product? Do we need a multi-dose vial or will this not be utilized in a campaign such that you could end up with a lot of wastage with multi-dose vials? So all of that clarity is needed up front but there are a couple additional things that are needed. One is accurate demand forecasting. How big a plant or multiple plants do you need? Will this be widely adopted? Will this have a universal recommendation for everyone at a certain age or will this be targeted to more high-risk populations? And from a funding perspective, will the funding be there for all countries or more endemic high-risk regions? You need clarity on that in order to be able to move forward with that investment decision. You also need to know that IP protection will be there and we know there's a few examples around the world where that's been an issue. You need to know that if you're developing this vaccine and expect there to be a high and middle income market but you're going to have tiered pricing and be able to provide a very affordable price in the world's poorest markets, you need to know that that IP protection will be there to justify your investment. You also need to know that from a regulatory perspective there's going to be support for efficient trials, you're going to be able to have low-cost manufacturing and perhaps tech transfer to organizations that may be able to take advantage of a lower-cost labor base, particularly in the South. So there are a lot of characteristics that are needed but fortunately we have a lot of very positive examples of things that have happened and that's why we have many vaccines in development even for the big three, HTB and malaria, where across those three we have four million deaths per year, most of which occur in the developing world. So we now have pipelines of seven candidates in the pipeline for TB, over 20 for malaria plus as you heard Tony talk, very promising results have come out over the past year and for HIV, he talked about the RV-144 results while modest, we can build upon that, we have some clues as to why that may have worked and then very importantly over 25 other candidates in the clinic, some taking advantage of the technology that Tony talked about, broadly neutralizing antibodies. So I'll just end with what Tony said, this can only happen through effective public-private partnerships. Thank you, Julie. So thank you for allowing me to be on the panel and I agree with everything that Margie said, in fact she taught me most of what I know so I'm very happy to support and agree with what she said. However, I also just came from Zambia and so this video is really remarkable to me. I came from Zambia where Zambia announced that it's the first African country to make a commitment, a national commitment to reducing cervical cancer among women and girls in that country and many of you know that cervical cancer is essentially an opportunistic infection associated with HIV infection. So in our world where cervical cancer, fortunately it's rare because we have screening and we have tools to detect and treat it, in the developing world cervical cancer is common, about 25% of the women in Zambia with HIV infection have cervical disease and it is a killer, it's the number one killer of girls and women in those age groups so it's a remarkable experience for the president and the first lady of a country that just had a peaceful change of government to stand up and make a commitment to this disease program in their nation. So why did that happen in Zambia? But it happened first and foremost because of the national leadership. The first lady is an OB-GYN doctor so that certainly was a big help but it also happened because of the leadership of the health ministry that you met, the leadership of the ambassador who was also on this video, the leadership of the missions from other countries who are there supporting this effort. It happened because of the leadership of the CDC in the country. Our CDC leader Larry has been out experimenting with inexpensive ways to diagnose and treat cervical cancer in the HIV clinics there. It happens because of the USAID investment in logistics and supplies. Happens because of the medical leadership of the teaching hospital there, the Zambians who are out but it will happen most importantly because of a woman named Mildred.  She's examining them, she's applying vinegar to their cervix and then taking a picture of it with a camera that has a magnifying lens and when she sees lesions that are white that's a sign that they're probably cervical disease and early stages of cancer. She, if she has a doubt about that, she flashes that picture by email to the doctor in the teaching hospital who's on call to run to the computer, check out the lesion and if he agrees that it looks suspicious she immediately takes a canister of carbon dioxide, frees off the lesion on the cervix, the woman goes home and does not have to worry about cervical cancer in her near future. Mildred is teaching women all over Zambia to be able to do this. So we're now in a situation where we have an inexpensive screen, we have an inexpensive treatment, we have trained personnel and we have a vaccine that can essentially eliminate the hazard for a whole generation of women in Zambia. Now that happened because of leadership, it happened because of ingenuity, it happened because there's a CDC that knows that there is a problem with cervical disease in the nation and can track the epidemiology and the unmet health need, but it also happens because there is a vaccine. And when we sit in the United States and think about cervical cancer prevention with the vaccines that we have, they're expensive, they're not easy to have distributed properly in our society because we don't have school-based programs, but we have the capacity here to protect our girls and women very easily from a disease that really should go away. But in the rest of the world, that vaccine is a lifesaver and we wouldn't be able to think about a cancer pre-world for women if we didn't have those vaccines. And the challenge is how do we make it cheap enough so that we can afford to use it in those nations? And one of the things that I've learned is that when Margie was talking about the market commitment, there's no better way to get the cost down than to increase the volume because once you've covered all that R&D cost, all the costs of the things that you try that fail, all the costs of building the plan, all the costs of the regulatory environment, all of the money that you have to put into it, at the end of the day, once you have covered those costs, any additional dose of the vaccine you make, you can make essentially for the raw material price that pulls it together. And that's how we get the cost down so that we can afford to bring vaccines into the areas of the world where people need them the most. But in order to do this, we have to know that there's procurement. So we need Gavi, we need the United States government committing to Gavi, we need UNICEF, we need the mechanisms that many of the developed world nations are contributing to assure that we can purchase the vaccines and that there's a future commitment to do that, not just this year, but five years from now or 10 years from now. We also need one other thing that was really remarkable in Zambia, and that was the mobilization of the partnerships. Susan G. Coman for the Cure is now working globally to mobilize women, build advocacy, and start at the grassroots to engage people in the awareness that cervical cancer is a preventable disease, and that women need that protection in order to thrive and to be able to raise healthy children who are benefiting from all the other vaccines that get distributed in the world. So you've got leadership, got the vaccine, you've got these incredible partnerships, and now we have social mobilization so that awareness and demand for these life-saving interventions can come through. I believe if we can do this in Zambia, we can do it anywhere. Thank you, Julie. Gina. Thank you. I guess I'm here from the perspective of a non-governmental organization, I guess we were called, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. And our focus really is on the global health aspects and the global health impact of vaccines. Tony showed a very long list of potential candidates for the life course, and out of those, we don't focus on all of them. Not only because of budgets, but because we have to set priorities to be able to deal not only with the R&D, but our commitments to Gavi and on the implementation side. And those priorities are set according to disease impact. The potential for preventing disability life-years lost. And so there are a group of diseases that we do prioritize, and of course it includes HIV, TB, malaria, but a number of others, including pneumococcus and rotobars. The challenge is in terms of answering your first question, which is how do we ensure engagement of the private sector? And I will define that very broadly, not only pharma, but biotech and the developing country manufacturers, so include private sector outside of the United States, is that we have sort of a triple challenge. For many diseases, not all of them, we're talking about first and manned vaccines that don't exist yet. So we're engaged with US and European innovators because really this requires innovation. And we've made some of those investments, but largely that depends on the number one funder in the world, which is really NIH. The second is that when we do have a vaccine, we need it at really large scale. It's either the world's birth cohort or catch-up campaigns that go beyond one birth cohort. And you take any competent, mature company that's used to dealing with markets in the US and Europe, and you're really talking about a much larger commitment in terms of the facility that's required, and therefore you have the potential for efficiencies of scale, but boy, do you have to make investments to get those potentials in efficiencies of scale. And I think the third challenge is that realistically, the problem in terms of cost effectiveness analysis is not one in which you would limit that analysis to R&D costs, but you have to look at what the potential cost effectiveness would be of vaccines at the end. And those vaccines have to compete not only with each other for attention on the global stage, but with the other potential mechanisms for ensuring impact, you know, in malaria, it's bed nets. Do you buy a vaccine? Do you buy a bed net? Do you spray personal protection, prophylaxis, and how do you pull together the story of how you would maximize impact? So we give industry a very large challenge indeed, and I think larger than if they remain focused on Northern higher profit markets. Now, under the framework of the decadent vaccines, and Tony alluded to it, which is really a collaboration to bring together all of the parties that are working on the various aspects of vaccine R&D on one side to delivery and financing on the other side. As I thought about the various work streams, and we're funders of the secretariat on this, the concept that came out of a speech that Bill Gates gave at Davos in 2010, saying there is so much potential for impact with ROTA and NUMO HPV being introduced this decade, but for the R&D base to really generate the next generation of vaccines, it really has to be the decade of vaccines. And so it's both. It's both about delivery and maximizing impact, but it's also about the R&D base. As I think back to the challenges we face when we had Jim Grant, the last time that vaccines were really beginning to be scaled up is that the challenge in the global stage has changed. It's not a single entity that drives or owns the entire agenda. Countries have to make decisions. There's Gavian as a financing vehicle, but then for vaccines, every single district has to meet certain performance characteristics and make decisions about where they put their resources. So the decade of vaccines is really about bringing leadership to bear across the value chain. And I think an example of that is the work that has been done on a malaria vaccine. You asked me to address one vaccine. So let's talk a little bit about malaria because it's easier than HIV, right? We have some things, we've got years of research, HIV has a lot more money. But we have a human challenge model. The most advanced vaccine was just recognized by Time Magazine as the number two invention or medical breakthrough of the year, which was rather cool, you know? But let's look at where that vaccine came from. The collaboration included pharma. So it actually was born out of a collaboration with Walter Reed in the Department of Defense Laboratories, which is something we haven't talked about. There really has been so much support for R&D particularly in the elected and emerging diseases coming out of those laboratories and their engagement with GlaxoSmithKline. And if I were to show you what is now a 30-year picture of that vaccine in its first iteration, it's the second iteration, and it's third, the trial in Gambia, there's a whole lot of work that got done and then here the Gates Foundation got involved. Really from the trial that had been done in the Gambian adults then to supporting to prove that it worked or didn't work and it was actually quite risky that it wouldn't. Actually thought that was the likelihood when we made that decision was to prove that it would work or not work in children. Has a couple of things going for it. The partnership structure, the challenge model which demonstrated the concept that it worked in humans, which is think about the enormous investment that industry had to make an HPV vaccine, not knowing till the very end they were gonna have something, not only was immunogenic, but it actually worked. That's pretty scary. And then what it has had is the ability to do, it has an adjuvant. And I want to focus on the adjuvant because adjuvants per se are very expensive products to develop, they have to be developed with a vaccine. And the reason this worked for GSK, I think, I'm not speaking for them, this is my assessment, is that because of the human challenge model they were able to test adjuvants and optimize. Malaria occurs so frequently, you can do a trial in 2000 toddlers and figure out if it works or not. And you don't need to spend five or 10 years and do it in 90,000 people. So really they were able to optimize the vaccine and then take it down into infants for the results that just got announced in the New England Journal just out of the first year of the study. So the industry is important, having a good scientific base with the human challenge model, having the product components like an adjuvant program to enhance the immunogenicity, which is challenging for a parasitic disease. I think those are all critical elements that allow a company to engage in something which really will not be a product for the North but really be limited to a product for the South. So maybe I should just stop there, I'm likely to take it further. Thank you very much, this has been very rich. I'm very pleased to hear the reference to the DOD Overseas Medical Research Labs which are terribly important and under recognized in the contributions that they've made historically and continue to make. And also congratulations on the Pink Rib and Red Rib initiative which is really quite innovative and exciting. And when it was first rolled out in early September, mid September here in Washington, it was amazing to see the excitement and the presence of Secretary Clinton along with President Bush and Mrs. Bush and the many other partners from the corporate side that had come forward like yourselves to join into this effort and to make use very systematically of those 250 PEPFAR clinics that are now becoming the access point. I wanna bring it back to questions around US policy. You made a strong case for strong upfront public sector investment as part of setting the incentives for the discovery and development. We're in a tough budgetary situation right now. We're in a very austere and uncertain climate. You could make a case that we're in an exceptionally austere and uncertain sort of climate. So the question I guess for all of you is how do you make, how you best make the case? Because this is a long run investment. These are not necessarily well understood and brought among a broad public but they're so fundamental to guaranteeing that those partnerships take place, that the development and discovery of new products proceeds along a course and that you can build towards that. That's one big question I was hoping you could speak to and related to that is do we need in this time that we are in, do we need a renewed focus on some of the innovative financing alternatives to both build into that, thinking about how we get through this difficult period because this difficult period could stretch for a while and what you're saying is you need the very long range thinking, that's what the decade of vaccines is about, that's what the private sector is looking for. So maybe if you could jump in, is Margie doing it? Sure, in terms of how do you make the case especially with these tough economic times, I think you have to focus on three aspects especially if you're within the US thinking about the leadership role that we play in global health. Look first at the human aspect, clearly that's what drives our global health agenda is doing something to help those more vulnerable, less fortunate and so with all of these diseases, unless you've got the vaccines that can prevent the illness, you can only get so far. We should absolutely make the best use of all prevention treatment technologies that we have available today. As Tony said, we'll bend the trajectory but the holy grail getting to the end will require a vaccine. So you can model that many different ways, sure you can model it that if we could really control human behavior, you could get to zero and I wish we could but we all know we can't control human behavior so we'll get to something less than zero. So let's let the experts who understand what you can achieve with human behavior and many groups have put forward projections. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation had a project where they put forward projections but you clearly can't get to the end game without the vaccines and how does that impact human beings, how many millions of lives will still be lost. Second is the economic impact and when you think about, I'll take HIV since I know the figures much better there, if we're spending globally $15, $16 billion a year right now to get, I think it's between six and a half and seven million people on treatment over the next couple of years and the projections have been if we go out to 2030 that will be over $30 billion a year to continue that treatment. I can't tell you exactly what a vaccine would cost when you get through that catch up cohort and get to immunizing a full cohort but it's in the single digit, low single digit billions if you look at any other model that's out there and so thinking about it from the cost effectiveness, the total impact on budgets globally, that's a clear argument and the third aspect to look at is just the leadership role of the United States, the United States government, the United States research institutions. We have been the leader in innovations like this and just imagine the pride we will have as a government and as a company if we reach that holy grail and we bring out the ultimate solution to these devastating illnesses. So from a 40,000 foot level for the United States government and the policy makers here, I would say it's really, it's about the three Vs. It's about development, it's about defense. When you think about the threat that infectious diseases bring, it's not just for those people over here as we learn over and over again, we're one traveler away from an infectious disease problem in the United States. So we have every reason to be thinking about diplomacy, development and defense in the realm of vaccination. Development in particular, it's not just health which is what motivates me to get up in the morning but it's about development from a global standpoint of economic security for the countries where people will have lower birth rates because they have more confidence that their children can grow to become adults. It's about development of the systems to deliver and produce vaccines and what an incredible force of economic growth this could really be and has been in nations that have taken this on. It's about development of capacity and infrastructure and rising into the global economy. Vaccines are a very important tip of the spear in those areas but they are also very important diplomatically when we launched the pink ribbon, red ribbon campaign in the country and I was just there last week, outpouring of human emotion, their love for the United States, their appreciation for what we do as a generous nation is really emotionally overwhelming. It is such a powerful statement that our country that has so much is willing to do this for the people who have so little. It's an absolutely epitome of the United States government at its best and it makes me personally very proud to be a part of it but I think many people in our country don't realize that their tax dollars are doing such good in the world and it's really important that we step up as policy leaders to continue to make those investments. Now those investments need to go to the NIH. There's no question that that's the powerhouse of basic research that fuels that kind of research all over the world. That those investments also need to go to CDC because if we don't have a CDC we not only don't understand where the disease threats are but we don't have the laboratory and the programmatic support to get immunizations with the technical capability where they need to be and we must continue to fund those DOD labs.  If we didn't have the DOD labs we would not have the surveillance capability that we have for understanding which flu strains are emerging and which parts of the world and what do we need in our vaccine in the United States. So it isn't just about a platform to put money into the global fund or to put money into the GAVI fund. It's about supporting those agencies in the U.S. government that are globally relevant and really provide a front line of defense of diplomacy and development for all of us. Chena, would you care? So in the best of all worlds I believe that global health compassion and understanding the impact on diplomacy would be drivers for U.S. investment. I think there are drivers for our investment. This is why we engage. This is what we see when we go out to countries. But I think what resonates when we're talking to decision makers here who are trying to make the difficult trade-offs and financing and investments in NIH, et cetera, are numbers. So the person who asked the question about and vaccines do very well on that. Prevention, highly cost effective. Really when you think about what you could invest in and you can make projections. It's called modeling. There are people who are spending their careers doing this. What you could invest in that would have the biggest impact U.S. and globally. And you test vaccines against other health interventions. They come out number one. And we have to be rigorous about bringing those numbers together, about utilizing them. I love Tony's figures. I don't know what the sources of those data are, but he's rigorous too, so I'm sure he's looked. In terms of not only impact on lives but impact on dollars, we have to make the case. And having made the case, and we need to bring the funders, the donors around those kinds of investments. I think the numbers have to speak for us. And we have to be rigorous about developing those numbers and driving their use. Thank you. I'd like to open the floor for some comments and questions and just stand up or raise your hand and we'll bring a microphone to you and please identify yourself and offer a quick comment or question and we'll bring together two or three at a time and then come back to our panelists. There's a hand right here and I think there's someone in the back row. So why don't we start with you, ma'am, please? Hi, good morning. My name is Ashley Weatherford. I'm from the Best Shot Foundation, a global child health nonprofit. And first of all, I'd like to thank the panelists for coming out today and taking the time to speak to us all. And my question is given the recent trends in economic and budgetary constraints, what is your overall sense of the future of public health programs in the next five, 10, 15 years including vaccine R&D and other health interventions? Thank you. There's a gentleman right here. Please. Sorry, Matt Lawler from HHS. I just wanted to ask about prioritization. So Dr. Fauci showed some slides with probably 75 worthwhile targets but giving diminishing resources and given what seems to be a broadening number of NGO private sector and government partners interested in this space, is there a value in bringing people together and focusing on two or three or five or some limited subset and really galvanizing more support around a limited list of threats? Thank you. We have a hand here, please. Thank you. My name is Ann Thompson. I'm with World Vision and the Core Group Polio Project which is funded by USAID and the Gates Foundation to play a part in eradicating polio. I just was wondering if you all could comment on the drive to eradicate polio in relation to resources and priorities, those types of issues. There's a question right here. Hand up. Then we'll come back to, we'll take the fourth. Yes, sir. David Curry, Center for Vaccine Ethics and Policy at University of Pennsylvania. I'm interested, perhaps for Julie, the Decade of Vaccines Collaboration has been mentioned a few times and obviously that longitude has interesting implications for industry. I was wondering how industry is participating or will participate in the refinement of that strategy. Thank you. Julie, do you wanna lead off?  How do we, how might we prioritize? And then Ashley's very broad question around what is the future for the next five to 15 years look like given the austerity. Julie. So I'll start. First of all, with respect to the future, I'm very bullish about vaccines in the future. I think that we're slowly but surely making progress on the big three, as you said, but we're also, I think, really beginning to build the social mobilization, the political mobilization, and the private sector mobilization necessary to really pull forward and continue to use this very cost effective intervention for protecting health. With respect to polio, I, you know, the world's expert in polio eradication is sitting here, was sitting here in the room, Steve Kachi, and we just have to do it. There's no question about it. It needs to get done. We can do it. Look at India right now. I think this is the longest India's gone without a case. This disease can go away and we have a responsibility to make sure it does. And yes, the last cases are very expensive on a relative scale. But once it's done, it's done. That's it, bing, bang, boom. And it's just hard to have any other talk about it. It just needs to happen. The question about prioritization is really the toughest question. And one of the challenges that I think we are maturing into now is an appreciation that ultimately the decider about what the priority should be is first and foremost, the person who's receiving the vaccines, mom or woman or child, but more importantly, the country. And it is tempting to sit in the United States and think we know best. But in actual fact, a country's agenda to understand and make values about their own health priorities is really the most important aspect of making decisions about prioritization. Many countries welcome the support and the input from technical experts in health economic data from outside of the country, but ultimately we need to be in a position where our vaccine agendas are first and foremost addressing the needs of the people in the countries who are making and paying for them. Having said that, I also think that prioritization is changing. We're seeing now multinational companies put enormous emphasis and investments in vaccines that will not be marketed in the United States. Merck is doing that, Glaxo is doing that. Companies are stepping up and saying that we have a responsibility here. This isn't just about the developed world. This is also about using our excellent science and our capabilities to solve problems in new markets. And we're doing that through partnerships. We're doing that through creative funding mechanisms. Merck has a wonderful partnership with the Welcome Trust called the Hillam and Laboratory. It's a nonprofit vaccine developer in India that is taking products that right now are not suited for developing world use because of cold chain requirements or various other characteristics and trying to repurpose those vaccines in ways that will make them easier to use or less expensive to use through the leverage that that kind of partnership can build. And there are many examples of this kind of innovative solution. So I think the prioritization process is beginning to have a better match with the true health needs in the world, not just those in the countries that can afford them, but in the countries where people need them the most. Gina. On the topic of polio, it's our number one priority. And I'm optimistic not only about polio, which has its challenges, but also about the whole arena of vaccines. And that's not only because I'm an optimist, but I also work for an inpatient optimist who wants to have, who saw a lot of money. And we all know about that. On the issue of prioritization, I do want to support NIH and other like-minded organizations that must keep a warm research base and make investments across a number of diseases at the research level. Where it gets really expensive and where we need to understand who's going to use it, that it's really wanted, is at the phase three trials. And while some of them are less expensive and other are really expensive, so that's an order of magnitude. I think what makes the difference is that people are informed and there's been discussions on what it is they want. This week, one of the decadent vaccines teams is in Namibia as part of their consultative process to understand what it is they need at a country level, listening not just Namibia, but the nearby countries in terms of being ready to introduce a vaccine, what is it that would actually help them? And they're looking for some help in things that may be technical assistance, that may be preparing for launching into a campaign. It was very, it was very personally gratifying, I have to say, to be in Burkina Faso last year for the launch of the MnNJ vaccine, which I'd been involved with the CDC and WHO teams in writing a proposal to this Gates Foundation prior to my joining the Foundation. And watch it go from a concept of partnership, potentially with pharma, to one in which it became a very sort of complicated partnership engaging not only CDC, WHO and PATH and NGO, but developing country manufacturer. And you can shrink 10 years of work, well nine years of work on that, to a launch in which rather than hitting the 99% of the population from H1 through 29 in 10 days, Burkina Faso did it in eight. And they did it with massive mobilization of the national resources and healthcare workers, but with 10,000 volunteers, it was done. And that is because that disease really matters to them because of the annual epidemics that they get. And I think that that prioritization needs to happen, particularly at the phase three level and with an eye towards not only what vaccines are needed, where have we done the right work to create the information base on what diseases are important, but also what Mark LaForce did for that project, which say the countries want it, but it has to cost less than 50 cents. And that forced a massive restructuring to actually be able to reach that goal for a single component conjugate vaccine. So I remain extremely optimistic. And impatient. And I am also impatient. Yeah, I'll try to touch on maybe two aspects of the four or five questions that we didn't hear as much on. And the one is in the next five years, I'm also very optimistic and I was thrilled to see that the Gavi funding coming through with the meeting that I believe with donors was held in June, including the US government being a strong supporter of Gavi. And I believe and I know Helen will be up here soon. I believe Gavi has about $7 billion in order to implement immunization programs over the coming years. And I am a big fan of what Gavi has accomplished. And I've seen firsthand, I sat on the board of Gavi representing the industry for a few years. And I saw firsthand how the efforts of Gavi were leading to tremendous uptake of vaccines, whereas historically it would have taken 15, 20 years to get an innovative new vaccine into the developing world after it was launched in high income markets like the US. Gavi has brought that down to a couple of years and it's just great to see with pneumococcal, the new vaccines now coming out because of the advanced market commitment, it will be even quicker. And so I'm real bullish on the delivery side of what we can accomplish in the next five years. I'll admit I'm more nervous on the R&D side and there are many government organizations that are subject to funding reductions because of the budget situation. You've heard Tony mention could happen to NIH. I know Nelson Michaels here, the MHRP or military program which funds important vaccine development work for HIV. You heard about the DOD labs. Certainly CDC could be part of that. We don't know what will come out of this USAID which is an important donor, certainly to AIDS vaccine research in our organization as well as capacity development in the developing world which supports vaccine trials. And so what we have to do is make sure that we're not short-sighted, that we keep the end game in mind and go after that holy grail. And I know it's difficult to fund both the delivery and the R&D for the ultimate solutions at the same time but I think we just have to find a way to really do both. And the last thing I'll mention is the question on industry involvement in the Decade of Vaccines Initiative. The initiative has been going on now for several months. We have Lauren Lombin who will be up here who's leading one of the task teams. I've been involved as has a few others who have had industry experience and the decision of the steering committee was to get through the initial phase including people who had industry experience but weren't currently sitting in roles in the industry and then to go to a broad consultative phase not only with the industry but many other key stakeholders and that is now where the initiative is over the coming months and I know many discussions are taking place to make sure there's industry input because I'm a big believer that to have solutions that will work you need to get the industry engaged and make sure you're coming at it in a way which is going to align with their decision making and incentive processes and then I think we'll be able to accomplish what we're setting out to do. If I could just add to that just a couple days ago I sat with the five CEOs from the other R&D vaccine manufacturing companies and we signed a commitment to support the decade of the vaccines and we'll be coming out with our own statement of what that support will look like and how we can do our part to step up and contribute to the success of the effort so I don't have specifics to give you today but we are certainly committed. Thank you. This has been a rich and wonderful discussion. Please join me in thanking our speakers. Thank you.


ey I'd be willing to help with your graphics and stuff and I was like that'd be awesome because like that's something again I don't really have uh a lot of experience at like I think my biggest experience thing is that like I used to debate myself and then I've got like a couple of master's degrees like philosophy and psychology and stuff and then I just enjoy it I don't know I mean that maybe counts for something and that I'm it's at least consistent we're here often and so otherwise I I have to be honest like the tech stuff and in even moderating after about 500 debates there's room for improvement to be sure so thanks for your your flexibility and so yeah I just appreciate you guys so thank you for that feedback thanks all for your love and support seriously I appreciate you guys you guys make this fun you guys cheer me up when I have a bad day you guys honestly I just appreciate doing this you guys make it fun the more the merrier thanks for all of your support you guys but yeah I'm pumped and so thanks for your kind words you guys seriously it means a lot we will be back Friday night and I promise it's going to be a juicy one you guys it's going to be an exciting one and so we you won't want to miss this one I can I can assure you and so thanks so much want to let you know we appreciate you keep sifting out the reasonable from the unreasonable and I wish I could stay later but I've got to run as like I had said I had promised a friend oh gosh I didn't even realize this this late so I definitely have to run but thanks everybody keep sifting out the reasonable from the unreasonable we'll be back next time if you have not yet hit that subscribe button and that notification bell for reminders so you don't miss this Friday surprise juicy epic debate and so thank you guys so much for your kind words Brooke Chavis and Jamie Russell and I just really thank you guys for everything appreciate all you guys love you guys and so thanks for all your kind words see you next time


history of collaborating with Davos. In 2015, we had the great privilege to become the global growth enterprise in the Davos conference. In 2016 and 2017, we also held IHE sessions during the summer Davos. And we talked about the Chinese culture and its application in industry and commerce and their changes as well. And this year is the same. The theme of this year's session is China's pop culture. First, I want to give you an introduction to the panel speakers. First, the president or managing director of Beijing Poly International Auction Company, Li Da. And then, Sima Mundi's studio, chief creative officer Chen Qiufan, China Development Research Foundation researcher, writer, and the Ugo prize winner, Madden Hao Jingfang, and Shandong University Dean of School of Political Science and Public Policy, Daniel Bell, and founder of Fintech company, Yongfen. Our topic today is Chinese pop culture. So the five panel speakers could introduce their observations on China's pop culture in the globalized world and the characteristics and development and also the creativity, the industrialization and commercialization of Chinese pop culture in this globalized world. You can share with us your insight and input and what will be our vision and what will be our expectation for Chinese pop culture. And you can share with us your different perspectives on this topic. So first, I'll give the floor to Li Da to shed some light. OK, I think it's very appropriate for me to be the first person to speak because today we're talking about the Chinese culture. China has a civilization of 5,000 years. And I'm doing artwork auction. And we do artwork trading. And every year we deal with about 30,000 to 40,000 pieces of artwork. And these pieces dates back to 5,000 years ago. We also have contemporary art project and also Asian-Chinese artwork. So culture in China is very profound and rich. It's a treasure trove. And right now we are talking about pop culture. For modern people, how can we understand the deep meaning of Chinese treasure trove? How do we discover this treasure of Chinese civilization and present this artwork to the future generations? This is a question that we need to think about. But we should be careful about some junk artwork. And we should be careful about introducing some junk art to our kids and to the society. This is not pop culture. And I've been thinking about this question for a long time. Therefore, pop culture is a very pressing issue for us. So you mean that, from your perspective, you've been carrying forward China's traditional culture. You talked about development and innovation. And how do we combine the traditional culture with pop culture so that in our contemporary world, they can be more brilliant so that it can attract the younger generation so that this younger generation can discover this fine art? And this is something we need to think about. And we need to discover the value of this traditional fine art so that they can better educate the public and provide value to society. In my mind, we have 5,000 years of brilliant history. We have Tang Dynasty, Song Dynasty, Qing Dynasty, and different Asian dynasties. And every dynasty is like a jewel. And we need to find a thread that connects the different jewel. So we need to be a sort of matchmaker. We need to bring together the jewels or the crown jewels of different dynasties to present this jewel to the world, to the society. This is something we must do because we are doing the culture industry. We need to, of course, think about the habits and preference of modern people so that we can match the traditional fine art with our modern taste. So they can be more acceptable. And for an artwork professional, I think this is something we must do. I think, for example, a traditional artist, Yang Liuqing, used the traditional methodology of wood carving to do this traditional art. And meanwhile, there are also some other traditional techniques like figurine making and clay figurine making. So this handicraft and this wooden handicraft is very brilliant and it's very interesting. So we should not always think about the stereotyped traditional art handicraft. We should think about the modern look of our handicraft. We need to think about how can we attract the younger generation and the kids with our artwork so that they can be carried forward. I think this artwork really conveys wisdom. It's also very artistic. It's very appealing to the public. In fact, I think there can be different subject for Chinese traditional painting and also for the clay figurine, I think there can also be different subjects. Actually, the technique is very beautiful, very vivid. And the clay figurine can show very vivid human expression. So this is a kind of a non-cangible cultural heritage. But we should not always focus on the popular Chinese traditional stories for this traditional artwork. We should think about some other, we can use modern languages and modern subject to showcase our traditional culture so that they can be maintained and show their vigor and vitality. And I think this is what cultural creativity and industrial creativity is all about. So Mr. Lee approached this subject from a traditional culture point of view. And Mr. Chen Chou Fan actually looks at this issue from a futuristic point of view. He's looking at present from a future perspective. What is your point? Yes, I think Matt and Lee's had very good point. How do we combine traditional art form with a modern look so that the younger generation and the whole world can be attracted? I just visited North and South America. And I also visited the Confucius College there. And the Confucius College is there also invited Chinese writers to share with the students. They can talk about the three bodies problem, the award-winning novel, and also Obama and Zuckerberg. They are also fans of the three bodies problems. Meanwhile, I read one famous America diplomatic magazine. In fact, some of these diplomatic magazines on diplomacy also studies Chinese science books to predict the future political landscape. I think this kind of writing or books discussing the interaction between past and future can really resonate with the audience and readers. And because these books can go beyond the border differences and cultural differences and language differences, we can create a community of shared future. This is some values shared by universally. So no matter where I go to, the Latin America, for example, if I read the science fiction written by, for example, Ms. Hao Jingfang, I can feel something in common, irrespective of the nationality of the authors. So what they write about is a reflection of their life and the tension or the relations between life and technology. So from my perspective, from science fiction's perspective, I think science fiction is the thing, the most important genre in the next 10 to 20 years, including books, science fiction, but on different media, for example, comic books, drama, or videos, or theme parks, or on science fiction. I think this part has a huge potential, especially so, because it helps us to share with overseas people a market of the Chinese values. For example, three bodies has been translated into 12 different foreign languages, and its sales is much bigger than that of the traditional literary novels in the Chinese literature. So this is the very value of the modern science fiction, a very good example of the culture, of Chinese culture going global, being shared in the global arena. So I think this is a very important genre, as I said. It is not limited, the audience is not limited to children. Of course, children is one segment. There are some fictions in which you can learn about science and learn about the attitude of using technology. That's all very well and good, but it's not only limited to children. The meaning is very profound in science fiction. So my prediction is that in the next several years, the production, the creation of science fiction is the very thing that we can bridge ourselves with the overseas market and the population. Very well said. As you said, it's not about the definition and implications of the science fiction in China and beyond China, but this is a matter of the whole supply chain. Yes, and on this regard, Ms. Haoding, well, maybe you'll have a broader perspective because you know very well of science fiction. And also, you're the first Asian that is awarded the Ugo Award, the science fiction achievement. And you're also from the China Development Research Foundation, so would you please share with us? The pop culture will be developed better and better in the future. As we're doing research, we're researching economic transformation or development and economies. The experts will compare different countries and people look at a lot of genres, a lot of industries, including the culture, the sports, and other technology-related education, for example, industry, as a category of other, as part of the whole pie of the economic aggregate. The reason we name these industries as other industries is because in aggregate, the size was very small, but now things have been changing. Its share was negligible, but now it's a very important driving force for China's economy. And I think this is the major trend. And some economic economists have compared culture, sports, education, and all other industries. They are all human capital intensive. They have very high added value. They are not capital intensive. The development is all driven by talented people. So I think for China, if we want to develop our economy, the culture industry, the sports industry, are no longer negligible, marginal, other industries, but they need to be taken very seriously and the outcome of these industries will also be better and better. I am very interested in the Chinese pop culture and how it will be internationalized or be shared in the international world in the future in which ways. And I'm very confident of its future because when we write, when we do our cultural creation, some, for example, geographic locations in China about the revolutionary past in the Chinese history, they are all very different from the products from what people talk about in other markets. All the things I mentioned are very specific to Chinese people's memory and to Chinese people's recognition. Everybody knows that it is important to Chinese history. They understand that. But they, so foreigners feel that these characters, these images are irrelevant with them. But now with the younger generation, the concept of border is blurred. And young people, no matter where they are from, have universal common issues. So when the young people from China, when they are creating, they also, they will not only talk about China's specific things, they will talk about stress living in cities. What do we do with our life choices? And our relations with the last generation, family issues, how do we balance life and work? Issues like this will be the target of the creation when they are creating. So, and this is more universal when we're talking about country, family responsibility. So when we are talking about this for the younger generation in China, they are talking about this in the U.S. for example. They're also talking about this. So there's more common ground between people in China and other countries. So this idea, the sense of connectivity will be built. This is the same thing in the science fiction industry. For example, when we talk about foreignness in our industry, we will talk about common issues like age in society. When we talk about bring this up, foreign friends will say, oh, we have the same problem.  So when the Chinese authors talk with the foreign counterparts, we're basically talking about the same thing. So we have common concerns. And this is a reflection of the tensions in the society. So there's no isolation between China and the rest of the world. We do not only focus on the Chinese specific things. We talk about the common destiny technology. So the universality is more and more obvious. As technology is developing very fast, the stories told by the Chinese people, by the Chinese artists in the pop culture, is easier to be communicated to other parts in the world. And the other parts of the world will be more interested in Chinese, the stories told by the Chinese people. But for the industry, it is still basically in its nascent stages. So when they produce different forms of science fiction, for example, films, it needs a lot of technology. For example, I'm involved in shooting a online TV series based on science fiction. So there, and when I look at it into detail, there are a lot of more complex things. I believe Chinese people are all fast learners or we are confident of the future despite the current issues we have. Thank you very much. I agree very much with what is said because I have first-hand information too. I'm on the communication and sharing of Chinese pop culture. For IG, for example, or the online TV series or the reality shows, we produce proprietary in-house TV series, we produce on our platform. So when we look at the content, what we are going to be talking about in our products, we'll talk about international topics that is of international nature that is irrespective of where they are interested in. So, for example, we talk about rock music, we talk about street dancing. All of these things are a source of attention in China but also beyond China. This is also the benchmark for us to choose the content of our products and those who participate, for example, the actors or the dancers, they will go to North America, for example, to learn from one another. This is a very good example of globalization for the Chinese pop culture products. You see the shift of content from being Chinese, very Chinese, to being international and you see the cooperation of the young people within and beyond our board. Mr. Hao, Ms. Hao talked about this issue with a broad perspective. Professor Bell is a foreigner who has been teaching here for more than a decade. So I want to look at this perspective. Yes, I want to critique, do some critique of this issue. Professor Bell will be speaking English so you might want to use your interpreting device. Pop culture power is relevant to what I... not relevant to what I researched but actually there's some relevant... I know that we've got foreigners here so I still switch back to Chinese English. So I want to talk about the Chinese pop culture and pop power. This is something very interesting. Chinese popular culture in the 1980s when I heard songs from Deng Lijun and also from Cui Jian. And what's very interesting to me is I was with some foreign friends and they love to sing those songs too. Of course you have to speak Chinese but they're very accessible. And so to me this sense, of course Cui Jian's musical band also included foreign musicians. So it sends a very important message to me that really Chinese popular culture is not a matter of being ethnically or racially Chinese. It's more a matter of appreciating the culture. And I think that's a very important point to make. And when you think of all the successful Chinese cultural exports it seems to me that they send a very similar message. Chinese food, obviously you don't have to be ethnically Chinese to appreciate it. Chinese music, you don't have to be Chinese to play it. Kung Fu, calligraphy and so on. Science fiction, you don't have to be ethnically or racially Chinese. So what it really sends a very important message that the kind of successful Chinese popular culture is the one that sends a message that this culture is very accessible and grounded in a history and culture not in race or ethnicity. And I think this idea actually has a very long tradition in China. Before the 19th century, the mainstream idea of what it meant to be Chinese was one that was grounded in culture.  You had to speak the language. You have to use and eat Chinese food. You have to practice some Confucian rituals, have a kind of family life and so on. That's what made you Chinese and not because of your race or ethnicity. That all changed because of Western influence. When the Westerners came in the mid to late 19th century, they divided, they cut up Chinese cities, divided them according to race like Qingdao or Hong Kong. The Europeans lived in the best parts and the Chinese in the less good parts and they sent a message that we can and should divide the world according to race. But unfortunately the Chinese learned the worst part of Chinese culture and this has a very long lasting legacy. So the argument I want to make is that we should restore this traditional part of what it means to be Chinese. That it's an idea grounded in culture and it's also one that is very successfully promoted by popular culture today. 现在可以用诸人讨论不好意思 有一点懒. Professor Bell shared with us his perspective. He dated back to the 19th century the Chinese culture, how it evolved and what do we do to make it more international. This is something that we pay close attention to. For me, I like this perspective very much because if you look at it randomly, you'll only see one facade. But if you look at it from another perspective you'll have a very comprehensive understanding of the Chinese culture because we've got different ways of capturing information, we've got more perspectives and we will have more channels, more media for example. In the past we only had mainstream media but now we've got all types of media that sends and receives information and also practitioners, investors, they have their perspectives too. And Yang Fan maybe is the right person to talk about this, your investor but also your self media too. In fact, based on my understanding, a cultural journey requires a lot of time. As for the Chinese pop culture, this is a very broad topic. Over the past several decades, Chinese culture and also the Chinese cultural influence is not really about the pop culture. And sometimes the foreigners may be more impressed by the Chinese tattoos and also some of the Chinese food but this food is not eaten by the Chinese. So that is why sometimes the Chinese culture is regarded as mysterious and so people only think about the Chinese culture as the four traditional classics or Confucianism but this is not all. And we always talk about the invasion of culture from foreign countries, the Hollywood block, blockbusters and also animal animation movies and these are jeopardizing the Chinese young people. This is the statement of some people but I think the Chinese nation is, the Chinese culture is very profound and deep. It absorbs all the foreign culture and elements and also created something new. I want to cite a scientific novel. As we remember in Three Bodies Problem, the author mentioned that the Three Bodies nation, the people living there have very transparent thinking so there was no cultural creation in such a nation. And when the human nation interacted with the Three Bodies nation, they discovered that the human civilization is so brilliant while Three Bodies culture and civilization are too pragmatic and that is why the Three Bodies nations absorbed all the human civilization and cultures and all the art and then they once again exported their culture back to human nation. So this is the author Liu Zixin described in his novel. I think actually this is also very relevant in the world right now. We know that a lot of the Chinese sci-fi writers also absorbed the culture of the foreign countries and then they combined the foreign culture with their own thinking and Chinese thinking and created a lot of popularity across the world. And we can also think about Japanese animation programs which is also very popular in Asia. I mean while hip-hop and street dance were also have their origin in foreign countries and now they are also coming into China and we also have such combination. So meanwhile a lot of the local hip-hop artists in China also has absorbed the foreign elements so this is very interesting. So actually I don't think it's about cultural invasion. We have assimilated this foreign culture. We exported this combination of cultures to the outside world. And in Western countries the countries emphasize the value of money and now with the influence from the Eastern world, from the Oriental world and I think they're more intelligent. I visited Oklahoma, a small town in the United States. I attended the Warren Buffet annual conference and I saw more Chinese faces than American faces in the Warren Buffet annual conference. So you see a lot of Chinese people are crazy about the Warren Buffet and I think a lot of the Chinese attendees are younger generation like me, but in America a lot of the attendees in that conference are older generation. It's so the age group is very different for China and America and I think the Chinese culture is very unique and this also reflects the anxiety of society and we call it knowledge anxiety. We also have the term which is knowledge for fee. For example, one friend may share one statement from Jack Ma and Lei Jun, the internet tycoon and then they can charge fees from their friends. So if I don't, so I will feel very anxious if I do not have access to such wisdom from the internet tycoons. So in Western society it's very popular and natural for people to pay to get knowledge and in China you can be a member of IGE and you can also purchase different contents from WeChat platform. I think it's important for us to pay for knowledge, but the process of payment is also important. When I pay for knowledge, I get comfort, I get satisfied, I feel like I'm not left behind. So when China consume the foreign culture, we are also learning from the other culture but in the same time this also reflects our anxiety because we really want to catch up with foreign countries. So I hope we can help more Chinese people to lower the threshold of knowledge so that it's easier for them to be educated. And from Yang Fan's remarks I can feel that pop culture to a large extent directly reflects the thinking pattern of the society. It also reflects the personal value of a person. On the other hand, the scientific and technology development is very rapid right now and so we have this mass media which popularized the pop culture and also the mass media, the mobile apps and mobile media and some other popular We Media platforms and live streaming and AR technologies enable everyone to gain access to the cultural product. And I wonder nowadays we always talk about the Chinese pop culture and from a globalized point of view we have to combine Chinese traditional culture with pop culture and we can tell Chinese story and describe Chinese story in a global voice, in the global language. And I think the mainstream users of pop culture has become more segmented or fragmented. Different people can get different channels to get their own preferred cultural content. So in this context I really want to understand how do you look at such phenomenon? I think the biggest benefit is you get data and we have this fast data collection and also this information spreading and also one's personal cultural preference could be obtained and satisfied in a very short period of time. So you mean that people can get easier access to their preferred content and with the benefit of AI technology you can see whatever you want to see and you can get a diversity of information and you also have different sources of cultural product and sometimes I will also teach my AI product. I will tell this AI machine, I like certain product and I dislike some certain product. So sometimes I will educate my AI machine so that they can predict my preference but I think AI technology may also cause a problem. What you get might be less diverse because you only get a certain specific source of information by teaching your AI machines. And now we have more different people only focus on their own specific culture and perspectives so that is why there is a lot of subculture that is emerging. So I think this kind of subculture have their own users and a large number of them. So from the modern point of view do you think which direction is better? What should be the path for China's culture in the future? I remember 100 years ago one famous person stated that media is information. So he predicted that in the internet world we might face such a situation. Now we have very fragmented time and meanwhile we also have this virtual space and our attention span is dominated by certain media channels. I think this is the necessity and natural growth of history. In the beginning of 1970s the mainstream media in China is TV and newspapers and magazines. Back then one piece of newspaper and magazine might cover 80 or 90% of the Chinese population because Chinese people have no access to other forms of media. But now we have much more diverse forms of culture for example subculture or underground culture. They are very vertical. In the future they may develop their own values and their own language. So I think different users on different media platforms may have different focus and meanwhile there are a lot of different segmentation in each of these media platform. So for content creators I think this might present a challenge. Right now if you produce certain content it's impossible for you to capture all the audience. A story can be told in different forms and different format. It can be told in the way, in the movies, in the animation films and also in the different media platforms. The stories can be told in different ways. But these content creators need to have the determination and confidence to break free from the past. And sometimes you can also use visual art to tell a story. So you need to switch your mindset, your thinking pattern. So that you can produce good results in different artistic forms. So I believe this is the best of the time and also the worst of the time for content producers. But it's also to do with technology and power. How do you guide the audience, the consumers, the value system, so on and so forth. Qiu Fan talked about the segments. They have different landscape. They have different words. The language system for example. In the hip hop program on IG.com we see two online community having a conflict with one another. This is a perfect example of different segments in the online community talking to each other in different language systems thus creating conflicts. This is a very interesting story that the outsiders are very interested at looking at. So you talked about these different communities being isolated to one another, not able to communicate, understand one another. But I think this is also a good thing because this is evidence of diversity in the 1980s or 1990s. If you read science fiction, he or she couldn't find anyone that had the same hobby. So he would just read the science fiction and didn't talk about that at all. That was the case. A lot of people thought themselves are the loner or the only person that appreciates this fiction for example. But now with the internet it connects all the so-called learners. So they've got their little communities in which they would be able to talk to each other. So this diversity is very good. But there's another issue. Now you've got these mini communities, one and another. They are like silos isolated themselves. It's like islands in the Pacific Ocean. And then one community has their own specific language different from other communities. It's the same thing in the southern part of the mountainous area in China. They've got their own languages. It's very good because it creates diversity. So different communities, different languages, different mountainous areas having their own languages. But if you look at the history, as history develops with prosperous cultures, then there will be certain of convergence of different languages, harmonization of languages. People being able to speak in a common language thus this would give rise to economic booming and so on and so forth. The Roman Empire is a good example. The Qing dynasty in China is also a good example. And also in the UK in its history, exporting the English language into other countries, these are all very good examples of using the same language and thus inspiring ideas converge one and another. Now for me, I'm all for this diversity of different mini communities, different cultures, different forms. But I think if this community creating stops us from talking to one another, stops us from being able to understand each other because we've got different languages, then it might go to another extreme. This is not all good. This will drag us at a primitive level. So I think even if we are now little islands, we still want this connection every now and then among different islands with the same language. This will be good for the prosperous development. Very well said. For the Chinese culture, yes, there are many islands here and there, but when you talk about the Chinese culture in Chinese, this is a history. This is about the history of the 3,000 years in China. And I think this is something that differentiated the Chinese pop culture from Western culture. Now if you talk about Western culture, we don't directly think about the ancient Greek culture, for example. We would think about many different things, but when you Chinese people talk about the Chinese people, you would go directly to Confucianism, for example. But in the West, this is not the case. In the West, when we talk about culture, we don't talk about the ancient Roman empire or the ancient Greece. So these are different pictures. In China, there are different, all of these little islands, but one thing that differentiates China is that it has its 5,000 years of history. On my way here this morning, I read an article on WeChat which says that the statistics show us that the post-90, those who were born after 1990 or 1995, they have a higher level of cultural recognition, which means that they are inherently open to the traditional Chinese culture, which is very interesting, because Yang Fan talked about this ancient China, this element of ancient China is a very big thing in online video games or novels and so on and so forth. So this element of ancient China is a huge point in this market, and it's also related to the creation process, to content producing, and this is very highly recognized and liked by the younger generation, by the younger consumers. My team in the next quarter will create an online TV series, based on the ancient, with the ancient Chinese elements. So some you might think are niche market, but it has a huge power behind it. So I think as you're talking about this, we need all the practitioners, the professionals in our industry. For example, we've got an ancient culture, but if we incorporate that in a movie, that's very good, but if we talk about a fox or ancient names, all these are very Chinese specific cultural images, and you can trace them back to the ancient Chinese literature. Also, in 2009, there was a TV, a film that is based on 18 monks. It is also very typical famous images, Chinese images dating back to the ancient Chinese culture, and the mode of transport of these 18 monks are all animals, imaginary animals, which can also be traced back to ancient Chinese literature. So you'll see the power of creation, the power of invention of the ancient Chinese is beyond imagination. If you look at the bronze container, for example, it reflects the changing weather at the ancient time, the ones we uncover from the earth. You would see the handle made of an image of an animal, for example, and another part of the container was the shape of another animal, and from that, you could actually tell at the ancient time in Henan province whether the climate was very like that of Thailand and Australia nowadays. So you could then analyze that the elephants at that time was in the nowadays Henan province of China, and then they immigrate to Thailand and other countries. So this is some very valuable pieces of information that you can give to experts. So you could then study what's been going on all along in this whole process. There's a lot of things you can discover and uncover, and this is the organic food. I was talking about the valuable things in our culture. You extract that part out, and you feed it to the future generation. So the form and the content is not limited to what we are now already have. We have a lot of more possibilities. That is why I'm not entirely happy with the cultural products we have right now. For example, a lot of TV drama is on the manipulation, on the conflicts, on the guanxi in the ancient Chinese palace. I don't think this is the only interesting part about the ancient Chinese empire. There was, of course, the conflicts of human relations in the empire, but that was not all. As if, at that time and age, people didn't have any real business to mind. They only focused on interpersonal relations. This is not the case for the empire, obviously not. So if this is the only thing that we have in the pop culture, then we need to do some critique or we need to anticipate some change because we can't zoom in to all these minor parts of the Chinese culture. We need to look at other parts, the valuable parts in the Chinese culture. For the audience, what do we feed them with? Is it only the dark parts of the ancient Chinese history or the better parts? Is it junk food or nutritious food we choose to feed our audience with? This is something we need to think about. This can be changed if the content producers or the directors, for example, the practitioners is all thanks to them. What do they decide to do? We do not compromise to the easier way out as long as it is popular, as long as you can make headline or produce whatever the consumers want. I think this is the conscience of the practitioners, the content producers in our industry. I agree with you. We've been talking about creation, but we do not blindly follow whatever it is popular among the audience because culture itself is very important. Whatever we produce, it carries the values we believe in. So for the pop culture, it is the same thing. We reflect the values we believe in, the value that the content creator believes and what he wants to convey through his product to the audience. So is it the creator leads or guides the taste, or does he only follow other people's taste? So this is a choice that the content producer needs to make. This is also a very relevant issue in the culture industry, in whatever form of artistic work we're talking about. So we need to concentrate our resources on creating the better part of the Chinese pop culture. So I agree very much with what you just said. Now, we've got very limited time left, so you've all been talking very well about the pop culture in China, how it was developed, and what is the trend in the future. So I hope that for each one of you can you talk about, in a very simple way, from your perspective. We don't go into detail, but in the next few years, what is the trend, the outlook of the Chinese pop culture? I hope that in the richness of the Chinese culture, we will be able to provide more organic food, more better food out of it. So with development of the pop culture, we'll be able to contribute to the healthy development of our society. This will be to the great delight of me and all the practitioners in our industry. So we'll take the essence of the Chinese culture. I agree very much with the precondition of inclusiveness development. When we talk about corporate culture, maybe it is popular, but it does not have any culture element in it. So this is something we need to tackle. It's more consumer oriented, more about entertainment, more about compromising to the taste of the general public. So the products, they, of course, are stimulating people's deep down emotions or reflections. We need to create more products like this. We need the practitioners, the platform included, to guide the development of a good value system through the content. I hope pop culture can pay more attention to the inner world of humanity, something that can really resonate with our human heart. American movies can really touch upon the biggest issue that really touched the heart of people. But China's pop culture fails to touch the heart of the people. And I think, in fact, we still have a lot to offer and we do have a lot of emotions in China. So I hope our pop culture can really cater to the needs of people's heart. So we can really produce wonderful cultural products that resonate with people. In Shandong province, you know, Shandong province is the hometown of Confucius. So I hope that this classic culture can be the mainstream. We can also study some new issues like AI and we can also explore the relations between Confucianism and AI. And we can also address the challenges presented by AI by using the values of Confucianism. Based on my observation, there are two things. First, so the non-mainstream culture component have become more mainstream. And the subculture, the users of the subculture have become the mainstream of these societies. So that is why they are promoting the mainstream culture nowadays. Now, with the development of the fourth industrial revolution and information technology revolution, people will be closer together and more interactions. So this means that the cultural sphere will be more segmented. And now, I think people now may focus on the same issue but they also focus on the different elements of the issue. So let me have this sphere of culture. And I hope that in the future, these smaller spheres can be connected or hope this isolated island can be better connected. And hopefully with more technology development, people will not feel that lonely. And I think for this short span of time, we had a lot of discussions. And thanks to your concerted efforts and attention, our culture has been more diversified. And this diverse pop culture means that Chinese power will be very strong and this power can be stronger and add more radiance and color to the global culture community. Thank you. That's the end of the debate. Thank you.


family and took some video and I thought it'd be a good opportunity just to do an example video. So I've imported all the clips from that I took and I've already picked out music I think that will go well with it. So the first thing I'll do is drag the music down here. I'm going to have this track be my mute tracks, I'm not sure if I'm going to use any of the audio. There will probably be maybe some few clips in here that I might use. Other than that I'm just going to grab my clips and drag them down here. You see it's not very long. Again especially with home of videos you really don't want them. They don't need to be long. People don't want to sit there and watch long home movies. This one's going to be about 40 seconds. People watch a 40 second video, enjoy it, it gives you memories and just kind of goes over everything that happened. So most of my clips, again I usually try to keep them around 3 or 4 seconds if not shorter unless it's a long panning view or my first clip like this one's still only 3 seconds. It looks like about 4 seconds. I make that the first clip and the last clip if possible longer so that I can have them fade in and fade out. Sometimes though like this example here, I was out with the family, we have two kids, we're walking on a hard trail, I had to push the stroller back so I never actually got a final shot. So I might use one of my, I took a few panning shots here in the middle and I might move one of those to the end. But let's go ahead, I'm going to just go ahead and I can actually grab the corner here and pull this out and now that will fade in. So let's see. Now you'll notice I film stuff thinking about how it's going to be edited. I purposely filmed these 3 shots in a row, actually 4 shots in a row that go together. So my daughter running towards me, I told her to come running towards me. I stopped the camera there, quickly turned around and started recording again and then I told her to stop and I came up next to her and told her to go look at the water and that's how I got these 2 shots. So you don't always have a little chance to direct but if you can, your kids will listen to you. Don't give them too many instructions but run towards me was the first 2 shots and I said stop, wait, I walked up, I said now come running over to this little railing and she did that and I got the next 2 shots. I think that's the only parts that I actually gave any direction to but it made for good shots. Okay next I have this shot over the water which is kind of a longer shot and I don't always do this but I might make that a fade so I can press M on my keyboard here and that will drag all these clips over as to go back to select and fade. We'll see how that looks but I'm also going to want to mute this so I'm going to just search mute up here with this clip selected and mute it because I have no audio on this track but I might use these tracks for audio so let's see how that looks. I think that looked good and I put the shot of the family stand there, I got the whole family looking around and again this shot's a little longer because it's a panning shot and I pan down from the sky there and so that might be another good place to have another fade effect. Most time I don't use too many fade effects but sometimes with shots like this they come in handy so let's see how that looks. Oh, I've got to mute that clip because there's really no need for any of the audio here except for in this shot here I think my daughter says something which now that I think about it I might move one of these shots to the end again. Sometimes you can also duplicate shots and people won't realize it so let's have a look. So I think that looked good I don't need to pan that part fade that part though so let's move these back over okay so from there fade to the trees coming down again my daughter running some come by the hardest part about filming stuff like this is getting in front of the family then getting behind the family then getting in front of them again I do quite a bit of running okay so that's this last shot my daughter's talking that actually might be a good shot with some audio so let's go ahead and type in here fade I'm gonna fade in that will fade the audio in here so let's see how this goes so there she says something but the audio is kind of out so let's add some video or some volume effects to this so volume key frame will to the audio down here and I'm just gonna add a key frame which we can see right here I'm gonna move it here add in a another key frame I'm gonna go here and this will lower the volume from here to here so let's see how that works out I lowered it way too much way too fast so let's go back up a little bit so it's nice to have a little audio clips like that occasionally even though it might take be a little out of place with the rest of video but you want to have those memories when it comes to home videos so let's go ahead and it still might be too low but let's hear it again so what I can do here is I can go with using this arrow key go to that frame you can see it sets a negative 20 decibels let's make it only go down 10 and see how that sounds so that was a pretty good volume there and I might want to come back up for an end title shot real quick I'm gonna save this project I'm just gonna call it Rook because we're at a place called Rookery Bay and I'm not gonna do anything fancy with the title shots here I'm just going to go add title clip I want to have a black background and I'm going to go and let's make text 75 sounds good and we can pick a different font if we really want but try to keep it somewhat simple it's just gonna be a simple we'll just do that that and we'll say Rookery Bay and it was August sometimes I put date sometimes I just put the month I forget what day this was it was a couple days ago so I'm just gonna say August 2016 just so I remember that anytime I'm going to center that text center center boom now again I can be a little fancy with this since the text is so plain I can do animation and I can say edit start and stop and what I'll do here is I'll just grab one of them and I'll drag it in a little bit just a little bit probably right like that and then I will center that center center and so I start it's clicked at the start so the camera's gonna zoom out so it's gonna look like the words are going away from the camera if I'm thinking of that correctly what I'll do is I'll bring that over here and let me go back into the clip here show background background 255 that will make sure we have the black background rather than the transparent background will be whatever color you put here which I'm going to go with black so now I can fade in we want that audio to fade out so we'll say fade make sure we have that clip selected fade out you can see the text slowly moves back a little bit here I'm gonna drag our audio out a little bit more and I'm gonna add a second title clip because this is Creative Commons music with attribution so I have to say music my Josh Woodward we will center that text center it on the screen and it's kind of large so let's go ahead and put it down to 50 and center it again center center okay now I will say sometimes you got to check sometimes again I think the glitchiest thing in Caden live is the title clip editor and sometimes you center stuff and then you go out and it's not centered this time it did center just always double-check that and so I'm gonna have I'm gonna have this clip fade to black and this one will fade from and to black I'll make the this clip let's shorten the fade from two seconds down to one second on all of these the default is about two seconds they'll make it about one second and I'm also going to come here and I'm going to set a new keyframe for the volume here usually I don't do this much with the volume and actually I'm gonna move this over just a bit like that add another keyframe and I'm going to move it back up to zero decibels so it has no it's its default volume there so it should fade a little low while my daughter's talking and then fade back up and then we can use the keyframes again or we can just drag this here and that will be a fade out so let's see how that sounds and I'm hit control s to save good to save regularly shark swimming to get you sometimes I like to have the audio not end right on the video either a second or two before or have it go a second or two after I just did it like I'm probably about a second before there but that's it and that's probably more complicated than most my home videos because normally I don't do all these you know like these two transition fades up here but most the other stuff is basically what I do and so I'm going to render this out and I'll put a link in the description or an annotation on the screen to where you can watch the rendered out video I thank you for watching I hope you're enjoying this bit these videos I hope you're you're learning the king lives actually a very useful very well rounded tool for at least basic video editing and yes you can do some basic special effects with them that's when it might get a little itchy but we'll get into that in the coming weeks we've already done a little bit on compositing but again thank you for watching if you enjoy these videos please films by Chris calm that's Chris of the K there should be a link in a description there you can search through all my videos from both my channels also check out my patreon page patreon.com forward slash metal x1000 there's a link to that in the description as well they come and support my videos with as little as a dollar a month if you can't afford a dollar a month you know you can help out by liking sharing subscribing and commenting thanks for watching as always I hope that you have a great