Hello and welcome to this virtual Ebola reporting workshop in English. This is Binidit Paveo live from London. Thank you to you all, wherever you are, for joining this interactive training session. An informative and really interesting one so far. Here's our third expert about to join us. It'll be Julia Belouz and she'll be talking to us about improving Ebola reporting. Julia, welcome from Washington. Thank you so much. So let me tell everyone that you are the health reporter for vox.com. You were in 2013-2014 the Night Science Journalism Fellow at MIT. You've written many articles for various publications including the British Medical Journal, The Economist, The Medical Post, McLean's, The Times of London, and I could go on, but time doesn't permit. So you're going to talk to us about trends you've seen in reporting on Ebola and lessons that can be learned to improve reporting in the future. And that will be through examples of stories from the African media as well as media from around the world. So let's begin, Julia. Thank you so much, Binidit. So I'm going to flip through. Oh, there we go. So 10 lessons here from reporting on the 2014 Ebola epidemic. And as you said, I'm going to draw on examples from various places and things that I've seen through both my reporting and obviously following the story very closely. So the first example, this is a story in the Guardian newspaper in the U.K. and I guess the U.S. as well. And you can see here it's talking about the number of Ebola infections in West Africa. It passes 16,000. This is a recent story. There have been many, many stories like this. The World Health Organization every week comes out with situation reports and we reporters dutifully report on those numbers. At the beginning of the epidemic in particular, I think there was a lot of emphasis on these numbers and on the virus as if it didn't live within people and within societies. And I think this is something I started to think about as I was reporting on this, particularly at the early stages, that there was this tendency to focus on the numbers and the virus and not the cultural context, not the societies, not how this virus turned up in West Africa and completely changed people's lives. What this means? What does this epidemic mean for people on the ground? What does it mean that schools have been closed in Sierra Leone, that people have been home from work in Liberia for such a long period of time? What does it mean that children aren't getting routine vaccinations as a result of the health systems being overwhelmed by this epidemic? I think we did a good job more recently of capturing those stories. But there were months where the international spread of Ebola, I think that was confirmed back in March, and it took a few months, I think, to get those human interests on the ground stories. And if I were covering this again, I would try to get to those stories much sooner and to remember that we need to focus on the impact of this epidemic on society and on the people who have been touched by this. This is an example that I think did a really good job from the East African newspaper. How Ebola has turned lives upside down in Sierra Leone, and it was just this fantastic report from a newspaper reporter who went to Sierra Leone, and he talks about what it's like to leave his wife, how he has to have this negotiation within his home, the fear at home about him going over there, the kind of precautions and steps that he takes, and then he talks about what he finds in Sierra Leone. I think there was an example of this woman who, she has a fight with her husband and she's left bleeding, and the nurses in the hospital think that she has Ebola and she ends up dying, and she's later tested for the virus and it turns out to be negative. So this is again very human, the reporter situating himself within the story and then also capturing these incredible stories from the ground. But again, it's a recent story, I think it was a November 12th publication date, and I think this is one of the lessons that we need to learn from this epidemic, that we should have got to these stories a little bit earlier on before we were already months into the epidemic. At Vox, we did this thing called Ebola narrative, so living through Ebola, and we started to just capture oral histories, like this virus turned up in people's lives, and how are their lives changed, so you can see, unfortunately we don't have interactivity here, but you can see we captured the story of a daughter who lost her father, who was a doctor in Liberia to Ebola. There was the story of a virus hunter who goes out into the rainforest of Africa and he searches for the viral host for Ebola, like testing all these different animals and talks about what that's like. We talked to nurses, doctors, people who were living there and just had their lives completely turned upside down by the arrival of Ebola in their country. And I think this is a really moving piece. It's going to be something that people can even, I think, refer back to for a long time. I hope that we can update it, and we have been updating it as we've been hearing from the people that we're featuring in these oral histories. And again, I don't think we launched it until September or October, so again months into the epidemic, but it's something to think about when we're covering these types of stories, I think, as reporters going forward. Another thing that became very clear in the reporting, so this is from Nigeria's Guardian newspaper, drinking this mixture made from a plant known as Uedu can protect people against Ebola virus. Of course, we know there are no approved cures or treatments yet, or vaccines, and yet there were so many examples in newspapers of these kind of single source stories, people making claims about a supposed cure, treatment, and how this could be effective in the fight against Ebola. And you just imagine all the people who might have gone out to purchase this, spent their money on these treatments and cures that have absolutely no science behind them that aren't efficacious. And I think that it was kind of a reminder that especially as health reporters, we need to remember when we're writing these stories, it's almost, you're like a doctor writing a prescription. People go out and they listen to what media reports are saying, and there was just a lot of examples of a real lack of skepticism about some of the things that were coming, about some of the claims, sorry, that people were making about treatments and cures. I think this was a good example from the National Mirror in Nigerian paper, and they do take a skeptical approach here. It was a recent editorial about rapid testing for Ebola and claims people were making about these test kits. And as you can see, the headline is crooks and fake Ebola test kits. And the thing that was fantastic about this editorial is that they use it as an opportunity to talk about how you actually get Ebola and to reassure the public a bit. So they talked about how it's actually very difficult to contract this disease. You need direct contact with people's bodily fluids in order to get the disease. And they talked a little bit about what the Nigerian government was doing to stop the spread of Ebola. So it was this, I thought, a really good example of, you know, taking a skeptical approach to some of the claims people are making about their Ebola fighting tools, whatever they're hocking, and then trying to send a public health message through their reporting. So another thing that I noticed pretty early on was that there was this real emphasis on, again, medicines and not really on the health system, not the context in which these medicines would be delivered. So this is an example from Newsweek magazine. And it was, I think this is from the summer, if I can see here. It was from pretty early on, from August. And they're talking about this secret serum, which is the ZMAP experimental treatment that's being developed, that was developed in Canada and now in the U.S. And they call it this kind of, they give it, well, the name, secret serum, which is kind of ridiculous in and of itself, but it took off in the U.S. media. I think it was CNN that started calling ZMAP a secret serum. And there was just so much emphasis on the drugs and on these experimental therapies. And there wasn't a lot of emphasis on the health systems issues that were clearly the reason that we had this epidemic was taking off in West Africa. The lack of preparedness, the lack of good surveillance networks, the lack of robust public health messaging and communications. Instead, there was this really strong focus on the drugs, which are, of course, important. And there may be this silver lining of the epidemic. We're seeing all these treatments and vaccines. I think there are more than a dozen going through clinical trials right now, which is incredible. But we don't want to focus on medicines more than the reason we're actually seeing this virus overtake a society in West Africa, which are health systems issues. So I think that was another lesson that I was reflecting on as I was watching the coverage of this epidemic. Junior health issues also, therefore, and health systems, you're referring to the lack of infrastructure, the poor infrastructure in those countries. Yes. To help deliver the medicines once, you know, they will be found in vaccines. Absolutely, yes. So you talk to people on the ground and you hear about how there are very few labs that can test for Ebola. In Sierra Leone, for example, I think there were only a few people who were coordinating the Disease Surveillance Network for the whole country.  I think it was three months after the virus turned up in Guinea. And we already had international spread before anyone realized that what we were dealing with was Ebola. And again, of course, it was the first time that Ebola had turned up in West Africa, so it wasn't really on there. You know, it wasn't on their radar, but you would imagine that there are very clear, yeah, the lack of infrastructure kind of helped this virus take root in West Africa and spread very quickly. And it took a while, I think, for that message to come through in some of the media reports. That makes sense. Thank you for that. Yes, absolutely. So another thing. Do you continue? Yeah, so contextualizing hope about new drugs. So this is a story where they're talking about how, you know, this clinical trial, this drug is arriving in West Africa and it's offering a lot of hope for people. And there are many stories about that, about cures, again, about medicines, about HIV, drugs being used to treat Ebola, about Z-MAP. And they're extremely exuberant and really hopeful, and they lack the context about the clinical trials process, the fact that, you know, only of the 5,000 compounds that are discovered at an early stage, I think there are only about five that actually make it into testing in humans and then maybe one that's approved. So, you know, of all the wonderful treatments that we're seeing being tested now, maybe we'll have one that makes it through clinical trials and ends up being approved for use in people. So I found that that message was missing from a lot of the reports, so contextualizing, you know, what it actually takes to bring a drug to market, what it will take to test, to go through all the stages of clinical trials testing in humans. You have the drug companies. You know, they... I'm sure there are altruistic reasons for being involved in Ebola drug development, but they were also kind of hitting the media very early talking about how they were entering testing in humans, how they were scaling up, manufacturing the vaccine before it was even tested in humans and approved should it turn out to be efficacious. And the media kind of, we were running along with those reports without giving readers context about how difficult it is to actually ever bring drugs to market, which I think is really important anytime you're talking about new drugs or therapies, especially in a situation as dire as we're seeing play out with this epidemic. So this is something that was kind of showing up in a lot of the reporting. So reporting on unconfirmed cases, particularly in the U.S., there were tons of reports on, you know, that a patient has turned up in a hospital in Hawaii who we suspect might have Ebola. When this happened in D.C., this is a story from D.C. Hospital evaluating a patient who has Ebola-like symptoms in my own newsroom where people are extremely informed about the virus. They know how difficult it is to contract Ebola. There was fear. There was panic. People were asking me, like, go to my cottage and leave D.C. And what does this mean for us? And, you know, we ended up taking this approach of we're not going to report on unconfirmed cases. We're going to wait until we have CDC confirmation to actually disseminate news about a suspected case because, you know, so many of them turned out to be false or they turned out to be malaria. They turned out to be flu. We did end up reporting on the D.C. case, but we used it as a way, sorry, as the unconfirmed D.C. case, but we used it as a way to talk about how many unconfirmed cases there were. So of the, I don't know, hundreds of potential cases we saw in the U.S., only a few turned out to be confirmed cases. So that was a way to kind of reassure the public and use the news to give people context about what this actually meant. So I think. Can I just introduce a quick thing, Julia? Absolutely. I would encourage anybody. This is your last chance, folks, across the world as you watch us. We know South Africa, Accra, and others have been very active. Do get your questions in. This is your chance to do so. Sorry, Julia. Go ahead. No problem. So that was a policy we took in the newsroom and I think it was something to reflect on in reporting on future epidemics. You want to actually disseminate news on a case, especially if so many of them, as we saw with Ebola, particularly in America, turned out to be, to not be confirmed cases. So the other thing that came up through, looking at the reporting, was some of the outlandish claims that were being disseminated through media. So this is a story that came through all Africa and it talked about essentially Ebola zombies. So it was Ebola patients who died of the virus in Liberia and there were two women. And to the amazement of residents and onlookers, the deceased reportedly regained life, which is clearly a totally outlandish claim. These, you know, these claims made their way into newspapers around the world. This was an example from the mail online and there were similar reports in the states as well on how ISIS jihadists were supposedly going to use Ebola as a weapon of terror. So they were going to affect themselves with Ebola, travel across the world and use this, you know, infect other people, use this as a method of suicide or jihad. And these are clearly completely outlandish claims and, you know, they were reported without skepticism. They were reported as, you know, this is an expert from this university who says Ebola is this potential terror weapon or here are these cases of Ebola zombies resurrecting in Liberia. And again, I wish that the reporters had taken a more critical skeptical lens and given people context about the absurdity and outlandishness of these claims instead of stoking public fear at a time when people were so clearly afraid already. And this is another thing that became very clear was there was a difference between people who were using science to inform their reporting on how Ebola spreads and people who, I don't know if the reporting was based on Hollywood depictions or what it was based on, but who were clearly quite removed from the science of Ebola contagion. So this example is talking about how male survivors are told to abstain from sex for three months because we know Ebola can be sexually transmitted for up to three months even after a person has recovered, which is something that you find in the literature I think well back into the 90s they were finding Ebola in the semen of survivors. So, you know, it was, I think, you know, you're seeing an example here where people are actually making an evidence-based report on Ebola contagion and what bodily fluids can transmit Ebola. And I think this was something that the public definitely wanted. They wanted to know what the science said about how you can and can't get Ebola. And we're now seeing like the New England Journal has dedicated issue after issue to Ebola. There's so much new science coming out of West Africa. This is one of the upsides of having this horrible epidemic with so many people, so many cases that we finally have this massive population to draw lessons from and to learn about, you know, where Ebola lives in the body, how it's spread. We're learning about the importance of supportive care and oral rehydration.  And it's something that I hope we would do with this epidemic going forward and in future epidemics. And then, so this is another... That's epidemics over Ebola, but also any health pandemic. Yeah, any, when you're talking about infectious disease, to try to stay true to the science, talk to people who have actually studied the virus and get an understanding of how this virus spreads in people, what we know about it, communicate the uncertainty. So there are things that we still, we're still learning about Ebola until this year.  But there were some things we knew and some things we are less clear about and to kind of communicate that information to readers in a nuanced way is so important. So this was another thing that... This is a story we ran at Vox. Can you get Ebola on a plane? So this came out just a couple months ago and it was a time when we had already run numerous stories on how you can and can get Ebola and Ebola contagion. But it was at a time when, during the midterm elections here, there was a lot of discussion around travel bans and what was happening at airports to protect people from Ebola and issuing visas to people from West Africa and whether you are at risk getting on a plane at this time where we have this epidemic that's going on in West Africa. And my editor, we had a meeting and we were talking about, you know, what are our readers interested in now? What do they want to know? And my editor said, you know, I think you should really take your story on how you can and can get Ebola and kind of tweak it to talk about how you can and can get Ebola on a plane. And I thought, oh my God, I can't write one of these stories on Ebola contagion. But it ended up being exactly what the readers wanted at this time. I think it was shared, I don't know, like 20,000 times on Facebook. It was read hundreds of thousands of times. It was picked up on the BBC, republished in South African newspapers, asked permission to republish a story. And I think it was an example of this need to really meet readers where you are. As a reporter at this time, I had already been covering this epidemic for months. I thought we were very clear on how Ebola spreads. I was ready to move on to other stories. But clearly, this was something that the readers really wanted at this moment. So that was a very important lesson for me to get into the minds of readers and remember where are they at this moment and how can you meet them where they are. And then just wrapping up, this is a really interesting graph. We made a box. So you'll see the purple line is Google Trends. So it's search traffic for the word Ebola. And then the gray bars in the background are cases. So you see that despite the mounting case toll, the trends in search traffic go up and down. And they were, in particular, that big spike that came in August when we had the first Americans who contracted Ebola in Liberia return to America. And there was just this massive public interest in it. But I think this is a reminder that public interest is going to ebb and flow. But we have a duty. Clearly, this epidemic is still going on. The transmission is still out of control in Sierra Leone. We're seeing things stabilize in Liberia and getting a little bit. But there are still really big challenges there to finally stamping out the virus in these countries. And we need to keep figuring out interesting ways to get readers into the story, to continue to cover the story, to keep the story alive, even when the interest might be fading. And I think it's up to us as reporters to find fascinating stories that will keep people interested throughout this epidemic, even when we see things kind of slow down in public discourse a little bit. And I think that is it, Benedict. Well, Julia, thank you very much. Thank you. Very interesting the way you kicked off there with the big stories about numbers, which again, praise on fear, the virulence, which is indeed real, but it really, and then the terror link also with the Ebola virus and jihadists, really sort of, in that sense, cheap journalism. Stoking fear, I think, was the word you used. Absolutely. It's important. It's people who are affected, Ebola, individuals, entire families, communities. It has a cultural, social, also an economic impact. And it's a human interest story. They are human beings, and we need to remember that in our reporting. So let me just fire off one or two quick questions. One is, briefly, what do you think reporters in African countries that have not had an outbreak break yet of Ebola should do? I think one of the key things that needs to be done is informing the public.  People take what they read in the media and they act on it. We have so much evidence of that. People have studied things that celebrities say or media reports how they have such a clear impact on not only people's actions and their health decision making, but also even public policy. So you have an opportunity to educate and inform the public about the best science to bear on public discourse. And I think getting through those key messages about how does Ebola spread, how have other countries stopped the spread of this virus? What obviously bringing the human interest element, what has happened in places that have been ravaged by this epidemic? How they brought things under control is really important. And so I think those are the kinds of things if I were in countries that hadn't experienced the outbreak, I'd focus on that. I'd also look at what is my country doing to prepare for a potential outbreak here. I'd talk to people in the public health department, people in government about holding these people to account about how they're getting things ready for Ebola and report on that as well. I think that would be a huge service to readers at this time. Yes, prevention. Prevention is better than cure, as they say. A question that comes from the U.S. Embassy in Lesotho. Hello, Lesotho. Thank you for being with us. What measures are being taken to stop the virus from spreading into countries where it has not been detected? I think within Africa one of the key measures has been limiting travel to countries where the virus hasn't been detected. So stopping, for example, with the Hajj that was happening, they didn't allow the issuance of visas to people from West Africa, which I guess makes maybe a little bit more sense than it does in countries like the U.S. where there are so few, there's a very limited number of travelers, but there are a lot of people who are going over there for support and the relief effort. So I know that's one of the key things that's being done. I'm also preparing surveillance networks, so the strengthening of disease surveillance networks in countries where information is disseminated of, you know, if you do have a virus, like there are reportable diseases that governments keep an eye on, and Ebola is one of them, and I understand that in countries that haven't had an outbreak there are precautions being taken about making sure that they're ready if a virus is tested positive to disseminate that information and have people on the ground who are ready to go out and start what's called contact tracing, which I'm sure many of the reporters are very familiar with by now, and that's just tracing the contacts of a positive case and making sure, following up with them very regularly to see whether they develop symptoms of the virus, and if they do, isolating them before the chain of transmission continues. Now a really important question that's just come in from Metro TV Ghana. Unfortunately I don't have the name of the reporter. Thank you so much for doing your job and asking a very pertinent question. Julia, here it is. How should journalists treat herbalists who claim to have cures? So I think that there are two approaches. One, don't report on them at all. If you know that well first I guess clearly we don't have any treatment or cure yet unfortunately. So there's a very good chance that unless this person is somehow harboring a miraculous drug that does curibola, that it's just someone who's exploiting the fear that has been spread by this epidemic. So I would take either don't report on it at all or report on it in a very skeptical critical way, just completely debunking the claim that they're making and telling your, if it's something that you think the public is aware of and is kind of starting to think about and talk about, use your role as a reporter to bring the science to bear, to bring independent voices who can shed some critical light on whatever claims that are being made to bring those to bear through your reporting. So I think one of those two approaches depending on how much public interest there is in whatever care is being or whatever herbal medicine is being talked about. That sounds like very sound advice. Another question from Lisoto, how would a dentist link poverty with the spread of the disease if there is any connection? Benedict, I didn't hear the first part. How would journalists link poverty? Link poverty, yes, with the spread of the Ebola virus if there's any connection? One of the first stories we wrote at Vox about this epidemic was explaining the economic context of these three countries that have been affected by the virus so explaining, you know, what does the GDP look like, what does the literacy rate look like, how many doctors per capita do they have, how many hospitals do they have, how many Ebola specialists do they have and then giving some context to that by comparing these countries to other countries in Africa and other countries around the world and I think when you do that, when you show the readers the data, when you show them those numbers, it becomes very clear that unfortunately this is a disease of poverty. We saw one story that came out of this epidemic was that, you know, in Africa the death rate for Ebola has been about 70% during this epidemic. In America 70% of people who have had or more than 70% of people I guess more than America, sorry in America and Europe, so in the west more than 70% of people who have had this virus have survived, so that's a complete inverse and we wrote a story on, you know, why are Americans who get this disease surviving while we're seeing such a staggering death rate in Africa and we talked to doctors who were on the ground working in Africa about what they were seeing and they were talking about poor sanitation, they were talking about the fact that people on the job were scared for their lives, like nurses were leaving hospitals because they didn't have protective gear that they needed to do their job safely. Doctors were rationing gloves there was such a low doctor to population ratio and when you can get those kinds of details, like, you know that really brings this contrast to light and it becomes very clear that this really unfortunately is a disease of poverty that's taken off in countries that just don't have the resources and infrastructure to handle and the preparedness to handle this outbreak. So what you're saying is that it is perfectly legitimate for a journalist to make that link if he or she sees that first-hand. I think so, yeah. Another question from this time from Akra, to report on the facts about Ebola you may have to report on misconceptions first. So how should journalists go about this in order not to create a panic? So it's a really fine line, like how do you sometimes I felt like the more we were telling people don't worry, calm down the more the public panic was kind of being stoked. I think one way to do it is to communicate uncertainty to people to say that, you know there's just about I think so one place where things really went awry in the U.S. was when we had the public health officials saying there's no way this virus is really difficult to get and then we had a case of a Liberian national who came to the U.S. with Ebola and he transmitted the virus to two of his nurses so there was this real skepticism in the public of if this is so hard to get how did these nurses actually get the virus. And he used it as an opportunity again to talk about the science of the virus so it actually made perfect sense that two nurses he did transmit the virus to two nurses but this was at the end of his life when he had the most virus in his body when he was absolutely contagious shedding so much of the virus and the people who were around him were working with him at that time in his life were exposed and got the virus but in contrast to that he was very symptomatic he was living in a small apartment in Dallas with his fiancee with her children and he didn't transmit the virus to them and so we used that contrast to talk about actually this is a perfect example of what we know about the science of Ebola and how it's transmitted and yes the two nurses did get the virus but don't forget that just days before he was admitted to hospital he was in this tiny apartment and they didn't get the virus so using those kinds of stories to turn them on their head a little bit and again bring the science to light for people and be honest also about the uncertainty be clear that we're still learning about this virus until this year it only turned up in very limited populations and there are things that we're still learning and being honest about that I think three-year reporting is important too and probably only builds public trust. Two more questions briefly from Khartoum so thank you Khartoum you mentioned Julia Cure's vaccines and you quoted an article with a Secret Serum we've heard says the journalist in Khartoum that a US company has discovered in an Ebola drug do you know whether this is accurate and if so is there a date for this drug to reach the African continent and then a related question Julia can condoms this is really important one can condoms prevent the spread of Ebola you might want to start with the last one can condoms prevent the spread of Ebola yeah I think so on the condom question I know that survivors are told to just abstain from sex for the I think a three-month period after their recovery so I'm assuming that there might be some uncertainty about whether you know Ebola can be spread through sexual intercourse during that time and so maybe I don't know whether they've done testing on whether condoms can prevent the spread of Ebola in the same way can prevent the spread of HIV and so I'd probably lean on if you're communicating this message to the public going with the World Health Organization and what the CDC are recommending which I believe is abstinence and on the question about the drugs so as far as I know very much in the clinical trials phase I know that the GlaxoSmithKline vaccine candidate just passed the first clinical trials phase in humans just for safety so nothing about efficacy but in a small number of people here that were tested in Bethesda Maryland the drug or the vaccine was shown to be safe and now early on in the epidemic the WHO authorized the testing of experimental treatments in Africa which are just starting up or getting going now or in the new year so as far as I know we're nowhere near drug approvals for any of these GlaxoSmithKline has started manufacturing the vaccine in the event that it ends up being efficacious but that's probably the furthest furthest along of any of the vaccine or treatment candidates that we have now and time waiters for no man or no woman so here's the last question Rain Bo Winsid from Johannesburg says I don't see anyone talking about one of the most interesting things about this epidemic 16,000 infected 9,000 survived can you comment Julia? That's such a good point I think that there have been survival stories we've run a couple of talks I've read there have been many different media outlets but the fact that people do survive I think there was this you know books like The Hot Zone and the movie Outbreak I don't know how popular they've been in Africa but they were these early depictions of Ebola as this absolutely deadly virus as something that caused you know biblical hemorrhaging in all of the victims of Ebola and that the death rate was just so high that it killed almost 100% of its victims now of course we know that this isn't true maybe this is what scientists believed at the time in the early 90s when these when the book and the movie came out but we know that many people survive Ebola that they go on to lead normal lives we know that only a minority of patients actually ever bleed so you know actually reflecting that through the stories that you're finding and not just going with these preconceived notions about this disease is really important I think some media outlets have done a good job of capturing those stories and also the hardship of survivors so people who survived the epidemic are often ostracized by their or survived the virus sorry they're often ostracized by their communities they have a tough time reintegrating people are still afraid of them and they tell those stories and to help at least the readers understand that these people aren't infectious anymore after they've recovered and you know giving again that human interest element to what you point out is an absolutely staggering statistic I think is really important Julia Beluth from vox.com thank you very much for your presentation also for answering all these questions in a really simple way for sharing the lessons that can be learned to improve reporting on Ebola and any other pandemic so that concludes our three experts presentations of this virtual Ebola reporting workshop in English thank you to all three speakers Martin Ensering Jonathan Hamilton, Julia Beluth thank you also to Doug France assistant secretary of state for public affairs Dr. W. Rudley Archer from the US center for disease control and prevention thank you also to Jeremy Connendike director of the office of US foreign disaster assistance the US agency for international development thank you for a really informative interactive session I hope you all been inspired by what you've heard during this training session thank you of course a big thank you also thank you to the US state department also to the WFSJ the world federation of science journalists who coordinated this program thank you for you in Washington the digital team who helped keep us on air thank you for your magic work there and finally thank you so much to you for watching in Africa all around Africa and all over the world so this is Billy Dick Paveo live from London thanking you asking you to stay and be well informed to be skeptical also to contextualize to remember Ebola and other health pandemics affect human beings people they're not just numbers they're not numbers they are human communities around the world and that has a huge impact and we have a big responsibility that we need to honor so be safe get local knowledge and be well good reporting hope you've been inspired


Hi everybody, Shawn with jaspyscasebrakes.com doing a 2019-2020 mosaic fast brake single pack brake number 73 random teams where we have 30 customers names and we're going to randomize the 30 teams. It's one pack brake so nothing crazy but at the end of the break we're actually going to take the original list of 30 customers names and randomize them with the top 18 customers names getting spots in the NT basketball random player brake that's coming up right after this. So stay tuned for that as well. Here's the list of customers from Anthony Remondi down to Mark Winter with the last 18 spots bought out and here's the list of teams from the Atlanta Hawks down to the Washington Wizards. Let's randomize this two and a four six times for the customers one two three four five and six in final time from Mark down to Ray. Now six times on the teams six in final time from the Orlando Magic down to the Utah Jazz. So we'll go through the list slowly just so everything's on here and then we'll sort it by teams so starting at the bottom everybody can see who they have it's a one pack break so if anybody wants to have a trade window your opportunity is right now as I sort this out and here's the pack Memphis Cruises and New Orleans Pelicans both with Mark Winter on this so Carmelo Anthony, Miles Bridges, Jeremy Lam, Bradley Beal, Malik Monk, Fast Break, Purple to 50, Hornets is Christopher Freeze, Jackson Hayes Rookie going to Mark, James Harden MVPs and Romeo Langford Rookie going to Mark as well. So that's the break now let's go back to random.org and now let's randomize who the 18 people they're going to get spots in the National Treasures break coming up after this here's the original list of names from Anthony down to Mark and a new dice roll is going to give us the 18 spots we're doing it five into three eight times one two three four five six seven and eight in the final time so from 19 down to 30 thank you very much Sean Maddock Mark winter Mark winter Mark winter Mark winter Mark winter Brianna Gilmore Mark winter Anthony Ray Mondi Mark winter Mark winter Mark winter Mark winter Stephen Procobra Mark winter Mark winter Mark winter and Anthony Ray Mondi all of you get spots in the upcoming NT basketball break congratulations and stay tuned and we'll be doing the NT break right after this jaskiescasebreaks.com that was 19-20 mosaic fast break pack number 73 random team with 18 spots given away in NT basketball see you guys next time


He was born in 1880, died in 1956, he came out of school at about age 20, 1900. He was a wonderful author and wordsmith, he was the one that created the term graphic design. So lettering and calligraphy, illustration, advertising and editorial design. He was a private press publisher, book design, modular ornament type design, and finally marionettes, which was a hobby. Here's a photograph of him working in lettering. This is from 1909. Early teens, I'd say maybe 13, 14. Dwaygan's decided that there ought to be some kind of organization for calligraphers. So he made one up. Here are a couple of early letterheads. This is just a beautiful infographic. There's almost no whiteout in this. Now he's really getting into book work. This is 1929. This is mid-40s. This was his first illustrated book. I think it's 1902, a woodcut from 1923. Okay, now we're getting into the modular ornament. So that illustration on the left is made up from the elements cut on the right. This is the time machine, the title spread. These are all stencil. Here's a repeating stencil. Again, Pochevoir printed amazingly hot color, wonderful color. Early 1930s, pieces of original art for shelf backs that was to be printed by Foil Stamp. So now we're going to run through the type designs real quick. This is Metro, and here's the first specimen of Electro and the first specimen of Caledonia. And we're into marionettes. So humans, animals, and aliens. This is a ticket to the marionette theater. And there you go. Thank you.


Global financial integrity was launched predicated on the notion that secrecy in the global financial system enables tax evasion, money laundering, and corruption. And that these activities foster continuing poverty in the developing world, inequality everywhere, and an undermining of democratic institutions. The framework of this opaque system, which includes tax havens, secrecy jurisdictions, anonymous trusts, falsified trade transactions, and more, facilitates the movement, hiding, and laundering of trillions of dollars. What can't be found can't be taxed. What cannot be seen cannot be prosecuted. The secrecy that has become such an inherent part of capitalism now threatens our financial system, our national security, and democracy itself. Money hides, democracy dies, and the goal of GFI and the DC Forum is to bring this threat into the light. To make apparent that opacity serves only those trying to gain the system, and that transparency and accountability is the underpinning of democracy. Capitalism and democracy are the two basic pillars of our economic and political system. They should be operating in sync to spread economic abundance and political engagement. Instead, they are becoming decoupled, no longer operating in sync. The capitalist side of the equation is running out of control, eroding the social contract, facilitating crime and corruption, evading obligations, enabling kleptocracy, maximizing income and wealth inequalities, and thus jeopardizing democracy. To address this disjuncture, I have written a book entitled Invisible Trillions, How Financial Secrecy is Imperiling Capitalism and Democracy, and The Way to Renew Our Broken System. It's due out early next year. We are initiating the DC Forum, together with other think tanks and other institutions and journalists, to address this issue of the decoupling between democracy and capitalism, and how to reignite the synergies between these two pillars of fundamental importance to our collective futures. For the past 14 years, the press and the public interest community have revealed an amazing array of offshore misbehavior. The Panama Papers, the Paradise Papers, the Pandora Papers, before that the huge UBS case, HSBC case, LUX leaks, the Lawanda Papers and others. All of these scandals and reporting reveal a huge volume of criminal activity enabled by a global interlocking system of financial secrecy jurisdictions and legal structures designed to hide the ownership and movement of assets. For the banks, the prosecutions have resulted in parking ticket fines and a promise to sin no more, and for individuals, tax judgments that are frequently uncollectible. In corruption cases, asset recovery has been infrequently successful and most often inadequate. Our purpose is to look at the impact of the overall problem of financial secrecy, identify its impact on the global economy, and focus on possible effective solutions. One of the problems in tackling the financial secrecy system is that many of us take it for granted, as though it is immutable. It is not. Just as we created it, we can de-create it. The PC Forum aims to motivate reform by holding a series of events, workshops, working with journalists and policy experts who help shape public opinion, and with experts in government here and abroad. We hope to nudge people beyond awareness of the problems described in the Panama Papers and other exposés to awareness that the enabling system behind these problems is not immutable and can be reformed. At a time when democracy has been eroded at home and is under attack from powerful autocratic regimes abroad, we must confront, as soon as possible, the extent to which financial secrecy is contributing to our current political decay. Countering financial secrecy needs to become a common cause among those who want to preserve our democracy and freedom. We hope you will find this notion of interest and participate in this endeavor.


Hello, and welcome back here to the channel. I'm EvilRabbit. We are staring at Frederick Ospo's A90 Supra here on Horizon 5 We're gonna be taking it into the twisties So make sure you guys follow me on all social media, I'll just found the description box below And if you guys aren't subscribed to the channel, I would appreciate you hitting that subscribe button and tap like But if you like this video, especially if you like that A90 of Frederick Ospo, so let's get to it Alright, so we are in Frederick Ospo's car. We're gonna get this flipped around and head into twisty bits There you kick in see what Ospo's car can do on these roads Well, except stall it out This is factory tuned. I have not touched gear ratios or anything like that So you gotta be mindful this gear ratio is set for massive amounts of wheel spin Gotta keep it up in the boosts. There we go. A little left of brakes goes through there So in fourth we're getting in to the much nicer section up here And it goes as far as we can in this Much of this road is possible. Now to the third Probably should have adjusted the gear ratio a little bit I feel once we get into the real twisty section We should be okay with the gear ratio we have set. Just kind of bogs it forth unless you're at massive speeds We clutch kick it we shouldn't be able to stay in power in fourth a little dirt drop. That's a major It's spin that a little bit too early Kind of hugging the inside line there and a clutch kicking and keeping her sideways Just string this thing out in third You know if we were going downhill we'd be able to string this thing out fourth all the way probably Get some other people drifting down the mountain. It looks like if now while we had no Almost over rotated it almost lost it, but we're good. Oh, yeah twisty bits now. I see him So it looks like slaps got a higher skill chain than me We have to make that change Don't have a cup of the XP board I should have but we going all this cars Ripping through these mountains. I've barked it Put down shift to the third. I feel like we need to attack this mountain again downhill or the different gear ratio set It's a really long mountain Right now to die We got this that's exactly what we wanted we're kind of Just demolishing this mountain all these roads are so many it's so long We got a little bit a little bit overzealous there We got this man. This car is so good on a basic basic out of the box tune Give them skill points alive though No, thanks. I was kind of a boxy turn. We got this As long as it stays caveman we should be golden As I say that we hit a bit of a dirt section. Oh, that's how they have it. Oh, is this a dirt now? Oh No We've changed it up to dirt So did we get to the end of all the payment? I Think we may have I think we hit The end of the pavement section. Oh That's unfortunate that this is not pavement But you know we can drift here, but we're gonna flip it around and we're gonna go full set back the other way And see if we can't keep this car in full drift If you guys follow me and also should meet all the funds good bucks below if you like this video You want to see more of this? Let me know down below. I think Osmo would be pretty bad that we're getting this car covered in dirt But uh, let's flip this around here. Let's do it You should be able to do mostly force gear I feel Nope That should have been a third gear turn. Now we can kick force gear. Try to stay in drift get as big of a Skill chain as we can gonna keep Throw the car back and forth both ways. Oh, we got it now Down hill is the way to go with this car. Oh, don't lose it Don't lose the drift points. We got it We're trying to get the full skill points Gonna tap some dirt a little bit off-road If you can't keep the skill chain alive this car just rips in third gear though. Oh My gosh, definitely love loving Osmo's car. No You hate to see it We just rolled Osmo's car On the mountain by clipping that rock Oh, that is You hate to see it Osmo's not going to be happy with that Yeah, we definitely need to change gear ratio for another one of these We're gonna probably try a couple other FD cars and tackle this mountain See which car we can get the best run. I'm kind of uh Kind of upset that I had to uh clip that wall that rock and Send the car upside down unfortunately that was uh Not the best thing So I think that is about we're gonna do it a 90 Magic Osmo's rock star a 90 here on force horizon Five tanking on the twisty roads. You guys like to see more of this Make sure you let me know down in the comment section. I'll blow up your subscriber I do appreciate if you hit that subscribe button as always. I think you guys are coming back and watching I mean, we'll grab it. See you guys on the track


Maen nhw'n cyrraffodol, cynnig honi, ffamiliau cyd-wympai. Sefydliad iddyn nhw'n arch am prosth잡 ddeunydd hwnnw gweithio ar hynny, ac mae gennym digon i'ch hynny'n go golf o ddiwylliant a pethau ac yn hafydlu'n gwybod i'r ffajffol i gyd-wmianol ac i nhw'n mynd i'r cyfnod. Mae hynny'n gweithio'r Ffagor 2015-i'r lleidwad rydych chi, gyda'r gwasanaeth iddynt iddyn nhw yw'r hynny'n gydwympai, postgraduate taught or research degree, this is a momentous achievement of which you should be incredibly proud and not only proud of these academic achievements but also of the infinite amounts of extracurricular activities that SOE students partake in, running over 250 societies supporting just about every progressive political campaign you can think of and creating initiatives and cooperatives, some of which have become nationwide projects or even evolved into their own charities, SOE students never fail to amaze. My vote of thanks is dedicated to the SOE's community, to the students, academics, non-academic staff, my union colleagues and outsourced cleaning security and catering staff who make up this inspiring, vibrant and unique institution which many of us have come to see as our second home. I'd also like to thank our director Paul, who will be stepping down this year for his dedication to SOE's, his academic leadership and his willingness to engage in endless debates with the students seen in. So thank you Paul. For the parents and families who have spent the last three, four, five, even more years, would you like to hang around?  But how can anyone summarise SOE's? Capture its fluid and continually evolving identity, its diverse and unique scholarship and political activity, the passion and dynamism of its community. I attempted such a summary when addressing new students in October. I welcome them to an oasis of critical thinking, of global south and subalton perspectives, of dismantling neoliberalism and Orientalism, of deconstructing social constructions and of planning Marxist, Feminist, queer, environmentalist, anti-Abelist, anti-racist, postcolonial and anti-imperial liberated utopias. Exactly. I told them that whether in the classroom in the JCR or Bar, on a protest at a society event, a party in the Hare Krishna queue on the legendary SOE steps, they would find endless stimulation and inspiration that challenges the status quo. In SOE's century in existence it has transformed from an institution of the establishment and instrument of British colonialism to the centre of critical and heterodox education in the UK and even in the world, comprising a community with radical politics who have helped lead countless social movements throughout the decades. Quite a turnaround. SOE's is now the university in which to learn from a truly global rather than Eurocentric perspective, in which mainstream ideologies are challenged and deconstructed and teaching is imbued with a passion for equality and justice. Our community do not merely study issues from distant ivory towers but rather seek to relate our academia to lived experiences on the ground and to use this knowledge and these relationships to advocate for a better world. This happens at three levels. The first is global. The regions that SOE specialises in are not obscure locations on a map that we seek to understand from a detached perspective, rooted in glorified dreams of neo-imperial adventure in the exotic orient or dreams of exploitative profit-seeking ventures in emerging markets. Instead, we seek to understand these regions because we want to understand the world as a whole and from diverse and localised perspectives rather than merely accepting the narratives of the powerful. In engaging with communities around the world, students and staff seek to support grassroot struggles and to create international solidarity from resisting austerity debt and structural adjustments, campaigning against the invasion of Iraq, to combating the destruction of the planet and struggling for free Palestine and Kurdish liberation, to name a few. The second level is the wider community. We do not only study and seek to engage with faraway places and issues out there but also with the communities around us. This involves engaging as staff and students with important struggles within the UK from fighting for free education and resisting the privatisation of and cuts to the welfare state, to fighting for the rights of migrants and opposing increasing discrimination towards international students and growing Islamophobia. The third level is our own institution. We do not merely assess the world around us but also turn our critical gaze inward. This involves self-reflecting on the ways in which SARS is not entirely broken away from its historical links with colonialism and still needs to decolonise itself. As much as we like to see SARS as a bubble, even with efforts by some students to declare it an independent state so that our bar would be exempt from UK laws which criminalise marijuana smoking, we also know that we are not isolated from structures of oppression and discrimination within wider society.  As a community we seek to engage in on-going attempts to collectively tackle these structures within our institution and educational practice. The SARS community's desire to address inequality and injustice within our institution as well as the wider world is most clearly demonstrated in a number of our on-campus campaigns. Justice for cleaners aims to ensure that cleaning staff are treated with dignity and respect. Fractionals for fair play aims to see fractional teaching staff paid fully for their labour. Campaigns for SARS to implement boycott divestment and sanctions by ending its partnerships with institutions linked to the Israeli military and democratise SARS, a campaign for greater representation, transparency and accountability within SARS's governance structures to ensure that the institution is run in the interests of the entire university community. These campaigns are ongoing but we did win the fossil fuel divestment campaign this year making SARS the first university in London to divest from fossil fuels. So as you can see students and staff are committed to practising the values that we teach in the classroom, which is not always something we can say for the management. Perhaps. So now as graduates about to leave the SARS bubble and enter the big wide capitalist world what advice can I offer you? Just don't do it. No. But as someone who hasn't left yet myself, I can't offer too much advice. But if my time here has taught me anything, it's that I will never really leave this place. Don't worry. I will actually leave. But what I mean, as cliched as it may sound, is that SARS and what we have learnt here will never leave us. A prominent stereotype about SARS students is that we all aspire to change the world. While this is easier said than done, we can as SARS graduates make a positive impact. So my advice to all of us is to take what we have learnt in the special place, to our future workplaces and communities, regardless of the country or sector and regardless of whether it's our dream job, to share the knowledge, passion and values that we have developed here. Don't stop questioning, critiquing, challenging and deconstructing and don't stop fighting for what you believe in. Remain engaged in important debates, continue your involvement in campaigns and struggles, organise in your workplaces, join a union and continue to take part in collective actions and protests which fight for a better world. But as you take SARS and what it has taught you out into the world, don't forget the place itself. The school will be asking you to be an engaged alumni and an engaged alumni you must, be an engaged alumni you must, but not just through an annual direct debit donation to the school, but rather through remaining engaged with students, staff and cleaner struggles for equality, justice and democracy within the institution and through remaining engaged with the future of SARS, which is an uncertain one given the government's privatisation and marketisation of higher education. This is a context in which small and specialist institutions like SARS are struggling and it is an education system which is increasingly elitist and inaccessible to many. So don't forget the SARS community, don't forget the institution itself and continue to engage with their struggles over the coming years. The message I want to leave you with is that finishing your degree is not the end of your SARS experience because you will take what this place has taught you into the world and use it to fight for much needed changes and because you will always be connected to and feel a sense of belonging with SARS and the people who comprise it. To put it simply, once a SARS-ian, always a SARS-ian. Congratulations again graduates. To conclude my vote of thanks, I thank you all for being the amazing minds, the comradely friends, the inspiring and creative society organisers and the passionate activists who make this place so magical and I thank you in advance for all of the vital work you will go on to do to help change the world for the better. Thank you.


While deployed, many service members do not have access to the luxuries they typically enjoy in Garrison. Forward operating bases, patrol bases and combat outposts are widely spread throughout Helmand Province, Afghanistan and many Marines and sailors do not have the opportunity to visit a post exchange. Without access to a permanent PX, acquiring a small taste of home can typically only be achieved through care packages. Luckily for the service members deployed to remote locations, the non-commissioned officers or NCOs of Warfighter Exchange Services team travel throughout the area of operations to ensure the Marines and sailors are able to purchase some morale boosters. Our mission is provided to guys on the front lines to outline PBs and cops that don't have PX at their location to take a PX out to them for a couple of days, get them service, get some basic supplies they need. West teams often consist of at least one MCCS NCO to run the mobile PX and one dispersing NCO to ensure the service members have access to cash. Additionally, postal Marines are often times attached to the West team to bring mail and pick up packages that are sent home. The Marines who operate the mobile PX begin the process by stocking their mobile store containers with supplies, gear, food, drinks, hygiene items, electronics and more. Once the Marines have a fully stocked container, the mobile store is loaded onto a tactical vehicle and the store and Marines utilize a tactical logistics patrol to fobs in need. Our job is important because it boosts morale of the guys that are out there. You know, some of the supplies they might not get, care packages or some of the things they might need. We can take it out there to them and get their booster morale by getting some of the things that they might be wanting out there. In addition to the Marine manning the mobile PX, a dispersing technician is sent out to allow service members to obtain a cash advance on their next paycheck. Basically what we do out here is we follow the PX team and we're just providing support for them so when the Marines come out, they can pull out cash from their paycheck. Marines and sailors who are deployed at remote locations throughout Helmand Province look forward to the West team Marines arriving at their fobs.  It's definitely a morale booster for all the Marines at the fob. Whether the West teams travel to larger forward operating bases where several hundred service members are stationed or they travel to smaller patrol bases where only a handful of Marines are, these NCOs take pride in knowing they are providing a morale boost for fellow deployed service members. I enjoy it because of the gratification of the Marines. They really appreciate it and we're able to take stuff out to them that they couldn't get anywhere else. Reporting from Helmand Province, Afghanistan, I'm Sergeant John Jackson.


I'm Salvatore Babona, and today's lecture is the Syrian refugee crisis, lessons and comparisons. For 15 years, the issue of irregular migration by sea has been a dominant theme in Australian politics, despite relatively small numbers of boat arrivals by European standards. Through aggressive interception and, frankly, extreme repression, Australia has quote-unquote stopped the boats from reaching Australia, though it has not stopped them from leaving Sri Lanka and Indonesia. Is Australia's model a successful example to be followed, or is it impractical for problems on a world scale like those being experienced in the Middle East today? And is the Australian solution morally acceptable, either for Europe or even for Australia? Australia consistently attracts irregular migrants by sea who come seeking asylum from conflicts in Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, and elsewhere in the Middle East, South Asia, and Southeast Asia. These sea arrivals to Australia reached a maximum of over 20,000 in 2013 and were a major factor in the 2013 election that resulted in the change in government from the Labour Party to the Liberal National Coalition. The Liberal National Coalition that came in under Tony Abbott in 2013 had a renewed pledge to stop the boats, but that's hardly new since every Australian government since 2001 has pledged to stop the boats with a succession of ever more draconian measures. John Howard, the Liberal Prime Minister in the early 2000s, came up with the Pacific solution. Asylum seekers were redirected to camps on Christmas Island, Manus Island, and Nauru, there was indefinite detention for unsuccessful refugee claimants, meaning that if people arrived seeking refugee status and their cases were turned down, they simply would stay in detention on a remote desert island until they eventually relented and agreed to go back to their home countries no matter what the risks involved. Obscure legal practices hidden from public scrutiny characterize the Pacific solution. The Australian government keeps a very closed hand, keeping camps closed to press scrutiny, closed even to court scrutiny, attempting as much as possible to keep the dirty laundry out of sight on these remote locations. Beginning in 2013, Australia's actions became even more extreme by international standards, with boats being simply turned back to Indonesia. There are press accounts and anecdotal accounts of asylum seekers being loaded onto rescue rafts pointed towards Indonesia and just let go, and their original boats being sunk by the Australian Navy. It's difficult to know what actually happened because of the extreme secrecy surrounding these interceptions. The government doesn't give any information on them, not even the number. It routinely refuses even to confirm or deny the existence of these operations. Meanwhile, of course, the press are completely excluded, with the exception of a small number of courageous investigative journalists who join the boats in Indonesia. It's risking their own lives to see what's happening when they arrive in Australia, or don't arrive in Australia, as the case may be. Australia accepts just 13,750 refugees a year through regular channels, that means through actual applications where a person has the opportunity to apply at an Australian embassy or consulate for a humanitarian visa to come to Australia. An additional 12,000 have been pledged for 2015-2016 to accommodate refugees from the Syrian Civil War. Obviously, these numbers are very small, not just in absolute terms, but also for a country of Australia's size of 24 million people. Australia is six times the size of a country like Lebanon, which has taken in some 1.5 million refugees. If the EU wants to follow the Australian example, and this has routinely appeared as a suggestion in the press and in opinion columns in the European Union, this would require cooperation from origin countries. Australian pushbacks are only possible because the Indonesian authorities allow it. If Indonesia similarly were to push people back towards Australia, there would be serious consequences. The origin countries in this case are mostly in the Central Mediterranean, Libya and Tunisia, especially Libya because of its ongoing civil war, and in the Eastern Mediterranean, Turkey with the connection to Greece. There's a much smaller flow from Morocco and Algeria to Spain. It's much smaller because Morocco and Algeria are both very aggressive in law enforcement to prevent boats from leaving their countries, so people smuggling and boat departures are severely restricted in Morocco and Algeria by strong national governments that in order to remain on good terms with the European Union, cooperate with the European Union by preventing people smuggling out of their countries. So the two main routes are the Central and the Eastern Mediterranean routes. The main route for arrivals right now and in late 2015 and early 2016 has been the Greek or Eastern Mediterranean route from Turkey. As a result in March 2016, the European Union signed a series of agreements with Turkey to cooperate in ending irregular migration. The basic deal is that the European Union will resettle 72,000 Syrian refugees a year directly from Turkish refugee camps to asylum in Europe. In exchange, Turkey will take back an equivalent number of irregular migrants who have arrived by sea and been denied asylum in the European Union. This is supposed to be a one-for-one trade for every person that Turkey takes back from the European Union. The European Union will resettle one refugee from Turkey. The trick here is that people have to voluntarily agree to be returned to Turkey. Now this implies that in all likelihood the people going back to Turkey will be people who wanted of their own accord to go back anyway. In other words, this is not going to be an absolute reduction or return of asylum seekers. This is going to be the natural flow that inevitably in a population of a million asylum seekers a year somebody will have reason to want to go back to their families in Pakistan or Afghanistan or Iran and that small number of people will voluntarily go back at European Union expense. This does not sound like a rational basis for discouraging people from coming to Europe in the first place. Also, the fact that this plan is limited to 72,000 people per year seems to invalidate the whole process since Europe is receiving about 100,000 refugees per month from Turkey via boat arrivals. So the plan itself does not seem very realistic. Now there are some accusations that European Union coast guards have been pushing boats back into Turkish waters in the same way that Australia pushes boats back to Indonesia and Sri Lanka, but very little evidence of this. There's much more evidence that the European Union coast guards are providing assistance for refugees and helping them in. There doesn't seem to be much appetite among security forces in the European Union to be involved in this sort of pushback operations that the Australian Navy is doing in the Pacific. There is the possibility that the Turkish coast guard will become responsible for pulling back boats. We know much less about that. Turkey is a relatively authoritarian state that has a tight control on the media and on reporting in general. So we'll have to see whether or not Turkey takes action on its side to prevent people leaving. There seems to be little motivation for it to do so other than European Union aid. Now the European Union has pledged to spend for about four billion dollars, about three billion euros, to help Turkey feed, house, and school Syrian refugees already in Turkey. European Union has also pledged in the long run to allow visa-free travel in Europe to Turkish citizens. Both of these pledges are conditional on, quote-unquote, good Turkish behavior in executing these deals and upholding refugees' human rights. So it's very questionable, given the character of the regime in Turkey, whether or not this whether or not Turkey will actually receive the European aid it's been promised, and if Turkey doesn't get the aid, Turkey is very unlikely to cooperate in preventing both departures in the way that Algeria and Morocco have done. In addition, there is a nascent civil war or at least civil conflict restarting in Turkey between Turkish security forces and Kurdish militants in the east of Turkey. It seems very likely that in addition to Syrian refugees fleeing Turkey, we might see an additional wave of Kurdish refugees fleeing Turkey for Europe, and if in fact the European Union gives visa-free travel to Turkish citizens, these Kurdish minority citizens of Turkey might become yet another wave of refugees coming from Turkey to Europe. So watch this space on the EU-Turkish agreement. It is possible, but in my view, very unlikely that it will be successful in stemming the flow of refugees from Turkey to Europe. If the Turkish route is closed into Greece, one problem is that migration won't stop, migration will simply move to the much more dangerous central Mediterranean route from Libya and Tunisia into Lampedusa, Malta and Sicily. These maritime crossings in the central Mediterranean are much more dangerous because they involve much longer stretches of open ocean and the oceans are much rougher than the oceans or the seas separating the Greek islands from the Turkish mainland. So even if the negotiations with Turkey are successful, it seems unlikely that Europe will be able to stop these migration flows. They'll simply shift to another route, another and more dangerous route. With this route, there is no mechanism for Europe to prevent departures from Libya because Libya is a country at civil war with no functioning government. Pushbacks or returns to Libya would involve returning refugees to the country in the middle of a civil war which would seem completely unacceptable in anybody's moral dictionary. There's no governing authority in Libya with the authority to accept pushbacks. There's no one to negotiate with, only a series of local warlords governing individual cities along the Libyan coast. Besides the number of people involved, 100,000 people per month for Europe compared to an absolute high of 2,000 per month for Australia really seem to make these solutions unrealistic for Europe. So the key takeaways are that first, Australia's Pacific solution and Operation Sovereign Borders have been quote unquote successful on their own terms. If the goal is to prevent people from settling in Australia no matter what the cost, these operations have succeeded in doing that. Of course those terms are very narrow. The Pacific solution and Operation Sovereign Borders have not stopped people from risking sea crossings. They've not prevented thousands of people from languishing in detention centers. They have not prevented the cost to the Australian government, the massive cost of maintaining these offshore centers and this constant naval presence at sea. Second, the EU-Turkey Agreement plans for the voluntary repatriation of up to 72,000 migrants per year, but the voluntary nature suggests that the people going back will simply be people wanting simply put a free trip home, not people who are actual refugees fleeing danger. It seems very unlikely that refugees whose lives are threatened at home will voluntarily return with no incentive or reward. Finally, Europe will almost certainly be forced to accommodate refugees rather than push them back on the Australian model. Even if European governments in the European Union decided that the Australian model was morally acceptable, in the European context it probably is simply impractical. The rich countries of Europe will simply have to accept that they have to participate in this global social problem of resettling people seeking refuge from wars on their borders. Thank you for watching this lecture. You can find out more about me at SalvaturbaBonus.com where you can also sign up for my monthly newsletter on global affairs.


Hi this is Ella here with Cal TV Entertainment. Now I'm sure you all know that Cal students are not afraid of a little controversy or shall I say controversy. So today we're going to be on Sproul asking some of the students some hard-hitting questions. Let's ride. So today I'm going to be asking you guys some controversial questions. So today I'm going to be asking you some controversial questions on Sproul. So get ready. Who do you think would win in a fight? Squirrels or Kiwi bots? Squirrels. Why so? They're just really aggressive. That is true. Squirrels for sure.  Squirrels can... Squirrels get what they want. They get what they want. Squirrels. Everyone's saying squirrel. Oh Kiwi bots. Kiwi bots almost ran me over the other day. Who do you think would win in a fight? You or squirrels? Oh me. 100%. Who do you think would win in a fight? Or in the duel actually? You or you? Oh me. Do you think Oskie is really a front for our chancellor Carol Chris? Who's Oskie? Is that our... Oh is that the bear? Who do you think would win in a fight? You or Oskie? Who is Oskie? No one knows who Oskie is. Oskie's our mascot, the bear. Do you go here? I guess like mean girls kind of. I don't know. She doesn't even go here. What do you think is the easiest major on campus? Shoot. Maybe media studies. Who do you think would win in a fight? Stanford or Cal? And like what kind of fight? It depends. Are you guys even students at Berkeley? Do you think that B courses is a good dating website? B courses? Do you go here? No. This was Ella with Cal TV Entertainment. Thanks for watching.