ot gonna work with them, we're not gonna collaborate with them, they're bad, bad, bad man. And their communities never grow, and it's like, or we outgrow them at least. Even some, there were some channels that have been bigger than us. And they had all these like big name people coming on, but eventually they're kind of narrowed it down. I'm not gonna name the channel that I'm thinking about. But I know of one channel where it's like they had these big name people on, but then it's like they kind of like only stuck to just those people, and their channel, now we've all grown them. And it's not because I'm like some sort of like, it's not because of me. One, it's because of the debaters. And two, it's because of this philosophy that we're all in agreement on. Namely, we're gonna give everybody their fair shot. We're gonna let a thousand flowers bloom, and truth is gonna prevail in fair debates. And that's gonna be a net good for society. Mango Tea, thanks for your super chats. This is James, I wanted to debate apostate prophet. Maybe, I mean, I gotta check with him, but let me know what topic you want. Email me at modernatobaitatgmail.com. We'll see what we can do. We might even be able to get you in next Friday. Maybe, seriously.  He's usually looking for Muslims. XXWLZXX says, is that true? Is there actually peer-reviewed studies that say that people become de-radicalized from debates? That specifically, no. However, there is peer-reviewed research that when you have logical arguments put forward, because I always tell this to people, I say, listen, you probably think the most logical argument is coming from the person that you agree with in the debate and that the person that you're wanting to be de-platformed you're probably thinking like, yeah, I want them de-platformed and their arguments are also less logical. The research suggests that the person with the most logical arguments will be perceived as the most persuasive and will have the most long-lasting effects on people. It's called the Elaboration-Likelihood Model. It's from Petty in Cassiopo and it's a theory. It's got mountains of evidence for it. It's Petty in Cassiopo was the original article or book from 1986. There is mountains of evidence that support that and people are like, well, yeah, of course, like the logical side will win.  You shouldn't even give them a platform.  Is that assuming you think that the globe earthers as an example, and I'm not taking sides on this, but I'm going to say, assuming you think that the globe earthers have the most logical argument, you should think that they're going to have the most persuasive effect on the public who views these videos. And so for those people that are, for example, they're flat earthers and sometimes people say, well, those flat earthers, some of them are really charming. Sometimes they're like good looking or they've got a good sense of humor and that is what wins people over and makes them look more persuasive. And I would say, hey, the theory addresses this, the elaboration likelihood model from Petty and Cassioppo in 1986 addresses this and it actually says that in those cases, the people with the most logical arguments will be most persuasive. That's called the central route of persuasion and things like good looks or being humorous or charming or charismatic, those are more peripheral routes of persuasion and they're not long lasting compared to having logical arguments. And so the peer review data is very clear on this. And so all the people who are like, oh, James, a lot of them, they claim that they're all about science and they're like, oh, I'm all about science, James. A lot of them, the ironic thing is, a lot of these people that say that, they're also like, oh, and I also think it's inappropriate that you platform so and so. I'm like, listen, the peer reviewed evidence would suggest that what I'm doing is good. It has a net good. And at the same time, when I push them, I say, what are your peer reviewed articles that say that? And they'll go, well, it's just common sense. And I'm like, okay, well, wait. Like I could just say my argument's common sense.  They don't even bring it.  If it's somebody, I want someone big time though. I'm not gonna take on somebody who's like, I can't remember the name of the, I'm not gonna, I don't wanna be mean to the guy because he's not here to defend himself. But I remember one of the guys is on this channel one time and he claimed he was all about science. He's like, oh, I'm all about science. And I'm like, oh yeah, as if I'm not, I'm getting my doctorate in the sciences. So he's like, oh, I'm all about science and you know, and he's like, yeah, I think it's inappropriate what you do here. And I'm like, which is bizarre. He's like, why are you actually coming on the channel? Like, anyway, so he's like saying this before a debate was starting. I'm like, what, this is bizarre. Like, why are you even on here then? But anyway, I told him, I was like, listen, the peer reviewed evidence and I explained the argument that I just explained to him. And again, like I said, he just didn't have an argument. He just didn't know what to say. And again, it was just, oh, well, it was just common sense. You know, we know that this happens. And I'm like, you can say that about anything. Oh, this is just common sense. Christianity is true. This is just common sense. Atheism is true. Whatever you want. It's like, so just gotta say, I'd be willing to debate someone big time. I want someone big time though. I'd wanna do it on intelligent squared debates. Or here, we could do it on modern day debate, but I'm thinking they wouldn't want that.  And so I'd be like, okay, fine, intelligent square debates, I'd be happy to go on there. Cause I could plug modern day debate. But the other thing is, it's a fair platform.   And that way I can show, like no, no, no, you're a hypocrite and these people who say this, they really, and that's the thing too, is like I asked them, I'm like, have you looked at the peer review literature? Do you have anything on your side? And silence, seriously, it's amazing. For them, it's just, it's, well, I just, I just feel it's bad. I just feel it's wrong. So, but yeah, I wanna say WLZXX says, that's amazing, super interesting. How do those articles define what is logical though? That seems a bit ambiguous. So I think they would say, it's, well, is it ambiguous though? Like XXLZXX, do you think that you have the ability to identify what a logical argument is? I can tell you, from a philosopher's standpoint, though, I answer it. So what would be considered logical one is, what's considered a sound argument is in philosophy, it would be that it's valid, argument is valid, namely that granting that the premises are true, the logic of the argument follows. Namely, like for example, if A, then B, and then you say premise two, A, and then conclusion B. As granting those premises, like if they're true, then yeah, it has to follow with an illogical necessity. So that's one way. Now, do they use that in the actual papers? That's something that I'd have to go back and check how they define logical. But I don't think this is actually that hard. It's kind of sometimes where people say, well, how do you know it's logical? It's like, well, how do you know it's logical even in your everyday life? One thing would be, yeah, that it is valid, like I was just saying. But the other thing is that an argument to sound, if both, it's valid and the premises are true. But cageotopia says, James, looking good, my man, hope you're doing well. Thanks so much for that. I appreciate that. And so, I want to say thanks for your support though. Tony, thanks for coming by. Appreciate you being with us. Axl Folly, thanks for being here. I like turtles, glad you were here. And then, as well as XXWLZ, XXX, thanks for being here. Leslie Flemmons, thanks for coming back. Good to see you again. And thanks for being a channel member. Seriously, that really does mean a lot. We appreciate your support. JG Daylett, thanks for coming by. And let's see here. Mango T, thanks for your support. Says I'm an X Muslim. So is AP. So I don't know. Honestly, he's pretty picky about it. He's pretty much only debating Muslims now. But yeah, I want to say, let me see. Any other channel members in the, I want to say thanks for all of our channel members. Thanks for your support, seriously. As well as, yeah, I haven't read out the channel members' names in a long time. The amazing level members. Don Fulman, Ozzie Intox, and Scott Mitchell. Thanks for all of your guys' support. We really do appreciate it. And you guys, we're excited about the future. I love you guys. Thanks for your support, seriously. I'm excited to see you at the next one. And don't forget to hit that subscribe button as we are excited about the future. And we want to say thanks, guys, for all of your support. I am going to get some sleep. It's 9.30 here. Mango T, thanks for your super chat. Says you're amazing, James. Thanks for your support, seriously. Amazing. Hey guys, you guys, I love you guys. I hope you have a great rest of your night. And I look forward to seeing you. I'll be hosting tomorrow. T Jump and Truth, Finding Truth. That's going to be tomorrow at 2 p.m. Eastern. So you don't want to miss that one. Hopefully I'll see you then. And then we'll have a number of debates next week too. We've got a lot coming up. So thanks, guys, for your support. I love you guys. Have a great rest of your night. And we'll see you next time.


Hi you guys! Welcome back to the next episode in my January series. This video is going to be all about how you can make this free people dress all on your own. Isn't it so cute? As soon as I saw it I was like A. that's cute and B. I can do that. So I was like flipping through the pictures reading the reviews taking like getting close-up shots and all the things to suss out if it was going to be feasible and I think it turned out really great. So before I reveal it to you fully let me show you how I got to where I am. So first of all you're going to take any pair of jeans right?  So I left about a 3-4 inch inseam. You do you on that part. Then once you have your leg you know which looks something like this you want to cut open. It really doesn't matter either the inseam or the outseam. I ended up doing the outseam but you could do this one as well. And then once you have that fully cut open you are going to pretend that this has the original jean hem on it. It would look something like this. Okay obviously this is not the same pair of jeans but you have this attached to this right? Take about I think I did six inch pieces so I cut six inches off the bottom of every single jeans leg. So for every pair of jeans you're getting two panels and I think I went through maybe five or six when I went to the thrift store or shop to your own jeans whatever you're doing. I was really just looking at it for a variety of dyes like I wanted dark denim, medium color denim, light color denim you know that kind of thing. And I was also making sure that all of the hems like looked similar. I didn't want one with black thread for example. I was trying to get all of them to have this gold. And the part that I love the most about the free people dress is that all of the hems look really worn. That's why I didn't want to just take denim and hem it myself and then put it together. I wanted to look like these have been dragging on the ground for however long they've been dragging. Okay so once you get to that place then it's time to like lay out your pieces and it might look complicated but it's really not. You're just going to lay one right side up facing this way and then you take another one and you make sure the hem is facing inward and you place them like this right and then once you sew that down then you take another one and you place it like this and you just start alternating all the way down placing each new jean leg at the bottom of the one below it so there's really not that much space underneath. And then in between each one feel free to come in and clip and cut and all of that. I didn't do that. I just left it all and it's fine. It's a little bit heavier but not the end of the world. Anyway so your next piece would go here and then here and then here and then here. Okay so the the thing with this is you need to make sure you are planning out your pieces a little bit because for example this one is not going to cover the entire width of my body so I would have wanted to put this one on top and then this one would have gone wait hold on overlapping this way yes and then this one would have gone here and then that might have covered my body so you just want to pay attention to the width of your strips so when you're shopping another thing that's important I forgot to mention is getting denim that's really wide leg flares those kinds of things. That way you have legs that are really really wide so that you have opportunities for them to be really really long and cover you know the entire like diagonal width of your body. I was able to use my dress form to accomplish this which made it really really simple. I have a ditto form if you're not familiar it's like an exact copy of my body. I'll leave a link in the description box if you're interested in learning more about that but it did make it super super easy for me to just lay out all the pieces and see where I was missing and when I was looking at the free people version the back is solid which makes sense because a it would be heavy b you wouldn't want to sit on all those seams so I was like that fully makes sense so I just grabbed heavier weight denim because this is heavy the top the front is heavy and I didn't want it to be pulling to the front so I was trying to balance the weight a little bit. I did that I grabbed some heavy weight denim and then I grabbed any pattern that I had that had a solid back this one happened to have the shy darts which I think is really flattering on my body. It gives a different shape than the inspiration the inspiration is more of a tent dress. This one obviously has like you know it's closer fitting to the body but I kind of liked that a little bit because there is just so much fabric. Anyway so I found this one this simplicity pattern 9223 and it just has like the plain shoulder sleeveless option and you know just no no waist seams nothing going on just a straight sheath dress and I use that cut out the back piece only sew the back to the top or to the front and this is what I have tada here she is in all her glory. All right so you can see the little bottom corners you barely need any width of him at all but as you get into the middle sections these are very very long so that's why you want to get wide leg jeans as best you can.  I did cut my own arm side then I sewed the back of that simplicity pattern so I have a center vaccine and these are the fish eye darts that were in there and then yeah it's just the rest of the dress. The simplicity pattern does have a zipper I didn't put a zipper in I just wanted to see can I get into this without a zipper I was thinking that would be easier and it is so I left the zipper out there's a lot of stretch in this just because all of these are like on the bias so I was able to kind of just pull it on not the easiest thing but not the hardest thing. Then I tried it on adjusted the shoulders and you can see I still have some raw hems oh I also made the back neckline more of a v on this one it is rounded but it just felt very like constricting. This is very high up on my neck if I could do it again I don't know part of me really likes it it's so high up on my neck part of me is like I don't know that's not really the inspiration part of me is like turn these down I don't know you guys are gonna have to to tell me I kind of think it's cool and unique and different and I don't I'm not trying to copy the free people one exactly exactly I mean maybe I don't know it didn't work out that way for me and that's okay that this is a little bit different but anyways you can see I have raw hems here I have raw arm size and I have a raw hem on the bottom so the plan for those are to apply bias tape and just turn them all under you know and fold them under and top stitch them I could probably get away with just turning them under you know and not doing bias tape but I don't know bias tape seems easier to me same thing for this back neckline so I can I left a little bit of space right here see how there's extra so that I can attach or turn under whatever I end up doing to make those match in the end okay and then same thing for the hem on the bottom you can just turn it up a couple times and then have your hem so hopefully this will get you going I will have a full reveal of this obviously once I get it all done get those little kinks worked out but I wanted to just give you guys the motivation and the inspiration to get started on yours let me know what you guys think of it if you have any ideas for me for the neckline or anything else that jumped out at you as I was walking through this obviously have any questions leave those everything in the comment section below and I will be back very soon with another tutorial using denim


And welcome to Screen Time Reset. I'm your host, Lauren Pair. While the research on the harms of screen time is piling up, the government, both on the state and federal level, has for the most part been missing in action. The U.S. is lagging behind Asian countries that are mandating classes for parents and young children. And even going as far in the case of Taiwan is making laws against parents permitting their children use of excessive screen time. Officials in the U.K. are also talking about taking action as social media has been implicated in promoting self-harm among teens. Fortunately, though, a few bills are beginning to pop up here in the states. Maryland passed a law last year requiring schools to hear about best practices for screen use. And here in Hawaii, this session, Senator Ruderman, Russell Ruderman, introduced bill SB 433, which mandated and funded the Department of Health to create an information campaign on the effects of screen time, which is the first such bill in the country. It made its way through its first three hearings and was just one hearing away from becoming law. But unfortunately, the House Finance Committee opted not to hear it. Today is the deadline, so it almost certainly is not going to happen. But it was a good first step. And we have with us today in studio Senator Russell Ruderman, Chair of the Health and Human Services Committee and Representative of the Puna District here to talk to us about it. Thank you so much for coming on the show, Senator. Thank you for having me. Making time in your busy schedule. Thank you. Absolutely. So let's just first talk a little bit about the intention of the bill and what it set out to do. Well, I think the intention of the bill is to bring some awareness to the concerns over the overuse of screens, particularly among children, you know, especially trying to, I think it was going to create a public awareness campaign to basically educate parents and educators and kids about some of the hazards that's been putting too much time on the screen. Right. Yeah. And we actually work together on this bill and the other piece is a website, right? It was going to create a website with all the research for parents put together. Right. And by the way, Lauren, I have to give you credit. This bill wouldn't have existed if it weren't for you and your advocacy on this issue. So I'm really in support of your efforts, although I share your concerns about it. Thank you. And I thank you as well because I'm not a senator. So I don't get to introduce bills. And it was so great that you're supportive of this issue and that you're looking out for our cakey and clear your heart is in the right place on it. Thank you. And before we talk a little bit more about the bill, just I was going to mention that you have a young daughter yourself, right? I do. I have a three-year-old girl. I have three older daughters in their 20s, but I all started all over again. I have a three-year-old and I'm observing the effects of screen addiction firsthand. You know, we are, I think, more conscious than perhaps the average parents, but nevertheless it's pervasive. And she's pretty attached to her screen. She borrows mom and dad's iPads if she's not watching TV.  It's the electronic babysitter. Well, now it's even more so because they're much more attached to it and much longer entertained. And it's more mobile, right? Like, I grew up with a lot of TV, but the TV stayed in one place and the iPad comes with you. That's right. And have you received, like, has your pediatrician talked to you about screen time and the effects that it has? No, we've never had any discussion with our pediatrician or anybody else for that matter.  So I think it's an issue that's been unaddressed. Yeah. And if I haven't been made aware of it, I'm sure it's probably true for most people, you know. Only the consensus of the parents I talked to. Yeah. So your preschool hasn't brought it up either? Well, my preschool has a policy which we really like of they don't do any videos or allow any screens during the day. That's great. So that's great. She is in preschool. She spends seven or eight hours a day there. And that's away from screens interacting with live people. And I'm very happy about that fact. I'm appreciative. I don't know how many other preschools or daycares. Forgive me, she's in daycare, not in preschool yet. I don't know how many of those have that policy, but I appreciate it. It makes, you know, whatever happens in the evenings, at least I know she was away from that screen all day long. Definitely. I know that plenty of daycares do have screens because I've talked to a lot of parents where that's the case. And I know that just in general finding childcare can be very tough on the islands. But certainly if you find a place that doesn't have screens, that is really nice. Because like you said, that's a huge chunk of the day that you know. And that command means a little bit more work for the supervisors there. But more effort and more work, but I really appreciate it. Yeah. But they haven't talked to you about the harms or the best of screens. Oh, no. Nobody ever has, except you. So I just think that's so interesting to me that just shows why the bill is necessary, right? Because parents are not being warned about it. You know, it's almost as if we're so aware of the opioid crisis now. It's almost as if there's a new such crisis unfolding before our eyes that we have not begun to address yet. I think we have not begun to address this. Although this bill is a start, right? That's right. It is a start. Yeah. And so getting back to it, you know, your daughter and that personal connection, but is there more to why you think that this is an important issue that's important to address via legislation? Why was this a cause that you're willing to get behind? Well, I see it from several points of view. For one thing, I'm an employer, and I notice when young folks come in, they're different than they were 10 years ago. They have a hard time focusing. They have a hard time looking in the eye. They're very distracted. They kind of want to pull out their phone almost, you know? I mean, it's made people a little bit different. And I sort of view the world as a biologist sometimes. And I think about evolution, evolutionary-wise, where thousands and maybe millions of years, we've spent our time looking at each other and listening to each other. And it not only teaches us how to speak and listen, but it teaches us how society works. We observe people interacting with other people, and that really is the foundation of our society. And now we have kids growing up in large part without that. You know, they're sitting around looking at their screen here, if they're sitting next to their peers. And then there is the extremely addictive nature of it that's scary in its own right, because, you know, it's an addiction in every sense of the word. And it's, you know, for us adults, we're making that choice consciously on some level, and we're responsible for our actions, but for kids, their brains are being wired in the first few years. You know, and I believe they're being wired differently as a result of this so much time spent looking at screens instead of other people. And we have no, we're conducting this giant experiment on our kids without any controls or even any real observation. We're not paying any attention to what the effect is on our kids. Yeah, I think that's spot on. And when you talk about that face-to-face interaction, that's also sort of the roots of empathy, right? That's how you start caring about others and being able to understand them a little better and read their emotions. And that seems to me the basis of a healthy society if people don't have empathy. Good point. Now really the glue of our society is how we all interact with each other and we're in danger of losing it. We're in danger of losing the norms and the respect for how we used to interact. And yeah, it's a great concern. Yeah. I think we'll look back on this ten years from now and think why did we wait so long to pay attention. I agree. Yeah. And the other thing that I find very, that's motivating to me is that kids are saying this is a problem. There was a study done, I forget if it was a survey, I forget if it was either Pew Research or Common Sense Media and 50% of teenagers admitted that they were addicted with 60% of parents agreeing. And my last guests were Mary and Paul and Councilman Mason Chalk from Kauai and they've done a bunch of focus groups. Their mission right now is one of them curbing the suicide in Kauai youth and so they did a bunch of focus groups not with any intention of talking about screens but it came up in every single focus group. Not the only thing that came up was the lack of time for adding to anxiety and depression and so in my opinion if kids are aware of this and are speaking out and saying they're addicted and to me it's like a most fundamental moral responsibility of a society to protect our kids. Yeah, I think that's a very good point. Yeah. So where in the process is the bill now? Well, as you mentioned the bill just reached a deadline I think today which it didn't meet. It did sell through the Senate without any no votes and one House Committee without any no votes it did not get heard in the House Finance Committee. You know at the end of session a lot of things come to a crunch. I can't say why. Sometimes we assume it's got to do with the fact that it was including some money and money is tight this year as usual but perhaps especially this year. And then there's other issues that come and take up people's attention at the last minute. Yeah. That may have been a contributing factor. Next I will continue to push this bill and we will reintroduce it or push the same on next year. Great. And I will be working more carefully. You know when a bill oftentimes a bill takes two or three years to get through sometimes ten. Right. But what happens is you look at where it stopped and then work on that. So next year I will have hopefully have some discussions with the Chair of the Committee where it didn't get heard and try to encourage her to hear it and see if we can't get over that obstacle. Yeah. That's fantastic. And getting through three or four hearings for first time legislation. I mean obviously better if it turned into law but that's still pretty good isn't it? It is pretty good. I mean really I mean only one out of ten bills passed in the end and very few that were being discussed for the first year passed. That is pretty good. That's encouraging. I appreciate you having that optimistic viewpoint about it. That's nice. And that's a perfect place for a break and then we'll be right back. Hey Loja. My name is Andrew Lanning. I'm the host of Security Matters Hawaii airing every Wednesday here on Think Tech Hawaii live from the studios. I'll bring you guests. I'll bring you information about the things in security that matter to keeping you safe, your co-workers safe, your family safe, to keep our community safe. We want to teach you about those things in our industry that may be a little outside of your experience. So please join me because Security Matters. Aloha. Aloha. This is Winston Welch. I am your host of Out and About where every other week, Mondays at 3, we explore a variety of topics in our city, state, nation and world and events, organizations, the people that fuel them. It's a really interesting show. We welcome you to tune in and we welcome your suggestions for shows. You got a lot of them out there and we have an awesome studio here where we can get your ideas out as well. So I look forward to you tuning in every other week where we've got some great guests and great topics. You're going to learn a lot. You're going to come away inspired like I do. So I'll see you every other week here at 3 o'clock on Monday afternoon. Aloha. And we're back. So next I wanted to talk about a few of the changes that were made and sort of this disagreement that I personally, in my opinion, have with the Department of Health but it's not just the Department of Health. It's something that I found time and time again when the bill did get through the Senate but it was amended in a way where they were going to talk less about the actual harms of screen time and just focus on encouraging kids to get outside and maybe mentioning something about screen time reduction but not really talking about the harms of screen time and I've heard this from other like relevant government departments. Again, it's not just our Department of Health. I even heard it recently. I was really surprised. I talked to a pediatrician who's connected to the AAP and he had a UH child psychiatry student with him and she was saying, we were talking about a research paper showing developmental delays for kids with excessive screen time and she said, but you wouldn't bring that up to a parent because it's sensitive and I thought that that was so bizarre because not that you shouldn't try to be sensitive but that's why it's important. That's why parents should care. We were talking about how convenient screen time is in my estimation for a parent to take it seriously and really put the effort to try to curb it, they need to be warned about the harms versus just being told without a real explanation like use it less. Where do you fall on that? Well, I also, I mean, it didn't get to a final form but when they diluted it a little bit to talk about, you know, screen time takes away from physical activity and being outdoors, that's fine but that's not what our focus was on this bill. There's plenty of messaging and research about the need to get exercise and I would hate to have this get lost in that shuffle. I'm all for getting kids outside and exercise but what we're trying to focus on here is the actual harm to our brains and our psychology that comes from this and that's a subject that's virtually untouched and yes, you're right. I mean, we can't be shy about talking to parents about these hazards. It would be like saying I could go back to the opioid thing because I think it's such an addiction issue. It would be like giving somebody their first course of opioids and saying and not mentioning oh, by the way, they're addicting and it can ruin your life because it's sensitive. You just can't do that. That's contrary to the public good. You have to talk about the issues. You have to, as you said, give parents the information they need to first of all be concerned and then justify their actions and be committed to making a change because every day God is going to push against that and you have to have reasons to be committed to change. Yeah, I think the opioid example is a perfect example because you don't tell someone no, don't take more than you're supposed to. You need to explain, as you said, it's highly addictive. It can ruin your life or else if you don't have a reason and it's kind of fun. You'll say another one, right? It's too easy. And I think that I'm glad that you're focusing on the addiction point too and that that's not lost on you because it is so important and it is something that yeah, it's I think one of the most important things because if you look at addicts it tends to ruin your life. You can't derive joy from relationships or things outside of the addiction and I think that's one of the real concerns, right? Is that kids we're seeing that in kids, whether it's with video games. We are seeing that and I think we're seeing an explosion of suicides amongst our youth and we don't exactly know what that is but it would be very foolish and unscientific to ignore the fact that that's correlated with this exponential increase in screen time and gaming too. Both things are related. Yeah, and it coincides so well I believe it was between 2007 and 2015 that the suicide rate for teenage girls doubled for boys it was up 30% which is still very substantial and it was right in the middle of that period in 2012 that the saturation of smartphones among teens hit 50%. So it would be quite a coincidence if it wasn't connected and I'm not saying that that's you know, completely conclusive 100% evidence but I also find that I'm not sure that that's the right way to think about like we don't need 100% sureness that it's causing this I think that at this point with the evidence that's there the burden of proof should be that it isn't hurting kids. You know people often say correlation does not create causation but from a scientific point of view what it does say is you better sit up and pay attention there's something going on here if one isn't causing the other then we need to find some other explanation for that correlation that correlation is meaningful and I don't think I don't think there's any way to avoid the conclusion that these things are related screen time use lack of social skills lack of social time lack of social ability is related to depression and suicide. Absolutely. And I think certainly with correlation there's even an extra element like if you have like a long time series when there are two sharp rises at about the same time that's extra concerning. Well at the very least it says we need to look at it we need to find an explanation for it and then you add in the fact that again with focus groups and kids being aware of it themselves when you see that data kids are saying it themselves educators are noticing it it's sort of all consistent with each other and coherent. Kids are saying it themselves unprompted while talking about other subjects that's actually that's big news to me because normally we ignore our bad habits and our addictions and we deny that I mean also if a kid is ready to to admit to out loud that they have concerns that we have a problem with this there's that awareness but it just shows how deep this issue goes. Absolutely and that's I'm hoping they're doing such great work over there on Kawhi I'm hoping that we see other that Oahu sort of see what they're doing and follow suit and conduct these focus groups with students and I don't think that we ask kids about these issues enough they have more opinions than I think a lot of people they love not saying they don't love their social media too they do, they have a love a conflicted relationship but I think that a lot of adults kind of assume that it's all love and in fact it's a lot more complicated and they're more aware of the the pluses and minuses than you might assume from reading about how they love their phones and are always on them moving a little to back to the fact that you have a daughter and just from your personal experience how do you see it affect her when she's on it when it's taken away from her what do you notice? The first thing I'd say I notice is the same thing that's true of adults that are on their phones or iPads is they don't pay attention anymore to what's going on around them they ask someone a question and not only do they answer they don't even hear it you know and I see that in my daughter if she's on her iPad I can ask her a question I can wave a toy in front of her whatever it's like she's completely blind to what's going on around her until you take that away and then sometimes you go through this little crying or protest period and then she'll be okay at least so far while you're engaged in that you really are tuning out the rest of the world to a really surprising degree to me a lot even more so than what used to be when we were just watching TV when you're watching TV you ask someone a question usually they'll answer someone's on their iPad they usually won't answer once again it goes to my concern about losing our social skills and our social mores or losing the actual fabric of our society if we are not paying attention to the people around us and what they're saying to us I mean that's really important to me we have to listen to each other pay attention to each other for us to have a society that works is based on any kind of compassion or empathy as you said how long does it take her to get over it typically her little protest periods how long do those last if it's up to me it's probably 5 or 10 minutes my wife is better at distracting her by the way if you take it away and then oh look here's something else so I could get better at it but I think it's so far it's pretty quick but she's only free I mean really I'm a little disappointed in myself that I even have allowed her to get to this point because I was aware of this all along but you know it's just as I mentioned it's just so tempting when you're busy your attires are here watch TV for a while or something so right now she can recover from that and change gears quickly but I don't know what the long term effect of that is yeah and I do I mean I have a lot of empathy for parents I'm not a parent you know I was well I have a three year old nephew who's a lot of energy adorable so fun but man they just don't stop and I was in DC a few months ago and I have friends with 23 year old boys and yeah spending a few days with them was certainly like I can definitely see how it would be very appealing and almost necessary at some points to take a break so that's um yeah it's important for awareness and I mean I would add to like I'm not a screen time purist I don't think that no screen time is necessary or anything like that but it is so easy to slip into more than you mean to and more than you realize I think really we have to get to a point where we sort of have a timer whether it's on the device or elsewhere where okay I'm gonna look at a screen for an hour or half an hour and maybe I'll spend another hour on it later in the evening but we have to have I think those external limits and we have to accept them and embrace them and force them I don't see any other way around it I think that's a good first step I think that's very true and then there are some apps out there now um the screen time app that Apple just rolled out last year um allows you to track it and actually allows you to set limits for your kids so that's cool it took them a while to do that but finally at the end of last year they did and then there's moment which is for tracking I'm really with you there I think that just the willpower it takes and energy and time it's a herculean task and if you have technology that's able to set those limits I'm reminded of I went to a little workshop this is probably 10 maybe 10 years ago 10 years ago so that was kind of new at this time and the guy who was traveling he writes for Mac magazine I can't remember his name and he was doing a presentation about the iPhone it was new it was fun and someone asked him do you have any concerns about it yes I have a big concern I'm concerned that it's one more way that we're all distracting ourselves from each other and we're all being worried in some little thing and this was you know 12 years ago and looking back on it he was so right on and this was an Apple advocate this was a technology enthusiast who clearly saw this emerging problem yeah and that's what I think it's so interesting too that Steve Jobs you know limited his kids tech and Bill Gates like the people that see ahead and really get the industry they had that sense I think that's very telling and those guys not only know more about tech than we do but they're really smart I think that's very telling that they severely limit their kids screen time I think they didn't get an iPhone until they were 12 or 14 or something it speaks volumes the strongest advocates for these technologies realize that we ought to be careful about our kids and what it's doing and it's just one more piece of evidence when we're talking about the correlation and kids mentioning it and educators bringing it up and then you have the heads of the technology industry themselves limiting it it all points in the same direction which is why I feel again like the burden of proof now is proof it doesn't harm kids because there's enough there for so just to sum up I'm thinking about solutions I think that the bill is a great measure and that's certainly one solution and it sounds like I guess you were talking about you know apps and timing for parents you know you don't need an app to set yourself an hour limit you just need to have a little awareness and I don't know that we ought to rely on an app to tell us to get away from the app you know it's also ironic if an alarm can go off that's useful but just because the bill didn't pass this year doesn't mean our Department of Health shouldn't become concerned with this and become active about it they tend to not do anything unless they're forced to unless you give them money for it but that's not their mandate their mandate is to pay attention to things affecting our health and I would think that we're all in this and there's no reason nobody needs to wait for a bill to pass to decide to take some action on it I hope that we can convince the Department of Health and the Department of Education to take this seriously and begin to do something about it I agree with that that's a really good point that this is an issue that's serious enough both on the health front that it's really time for the government to step up and to support parents everyone likes to blame parents it's a whole society issue and parents need more support and better information it takes a whole village to ruin a kid what a perfect way to end it but maybe we'll just add a slightly positive note to that a village to protect our kids and warn our kids and I think that the bill you put forward is a great start the bill we put forward and now it is on the radar of the Department of Health and they do say that they see this so you're right introducing the bill again is great but government can act even without that and I commend you Lauren for really your state's biggest advocate on this issue and looking back on it you're going to be one of the heroes in trying to call attention to this I appreciate that and this show is no small part of it it's very important that we're doing this and I appreciate Think Tech for giving you this forum me too, thank you to Think Tech and to Jay Fidel well thank you so much for coming here to talk about this with me and for your willingness and advocacy and speaking candidly and publicly about it really appreciate it thanks for tuning in and until next time this is Lauren Pair signing off for Screen Time Reset


The biggest sporting extravaganza is unfolding in one of the richest countries in the world. Qatar is supposed to have spent 300 billion dollars on the World Cup. That is nearly 60% of India's annual budget to host just one single event. Why has Qatar done it? Because football is now a global religion. 3.6 billion people were supposed to have watched the 2018 World Cup on TV and digital channels. That is nearly half the world's population at that time. This time FIFA expects that the World Cup will be watched by 5 billion people. That is more than 60% of the world's population. This massive popularity of football makes it the richest sport in the world. Football matches, the teams, the industry as a whole is expected to generate 600 billion dollars in revenue this year. Cabela took cricket, which many of us consider to be a huge money spinner. The entire cricket industry is expected to generate just 6 billion dollars. A lot of money, but when you compare to football's monetary worth, it is 100 times that of cricket. Which is why out of the top 5 highest paid athletes in the world, 3 are football players. Lionel Messi, Cristiano Ronaldo and Neymar. Between the 3 of them, they expect it to earn 340 million dollars this year. Football sells millions of products across the world and it can build mega brands. And that is exactly what Qatar is looking to do. It has built its fortune on oil and gas. Now it wants to reposition itself as the world increasingly turns away from fossil fuels. Qatar wants to become a household name and build a brand for the future. But football wasn't always such a money spinning game. It started off as a working class sport, the people's game. Often played and watched by workers on Saturday afternoons when they got off early from work. Football historians say workers and sailors took football from England to other parts of Europe and to Latin America. And gradually, as football clubs developed across the world, players emerged as idols to be worshipped by loyal fans. Who would turn up in stadiums in their club colours. Football games began gradually to be shown on national TV, reaching those who couldn't make it to the grounds. And football players gradually began to make good money. But the real big money in football only came after FIFA started selling TV rights to private channel. In fact, Italia 90, the World Cup of 1990, was the last time that public broadcasters in Italy had the rights to telecast the games live. Two years later, the top English teams got lucrative TV deals to leave the country's footballing and form the Premier League. This was to set off a TV rights revolution across the world which turned football into a money generating machine. Football matches of top clubs began to be broadcast across the world. And someone sitting in New Delhi, far away, could become a loyal fan of Manchester United, feel the highs when it won matches and get depressed if they lost. Football merchandise became big business. Fans spent their time and money to get hold of jerseys of their favourite players. This is a gigantic global business. Good players sign up with big clubs to get TV contracts for the matches they play. TV channels broadcast these matches across the world and rake in millions of dollars in advertising revenue. Advertisers go one step forward and sign up top football stars to endorse their brands and build these stars into even bigger brands who now get even more money from the big clubs who in turn get bigger TV contracts and so on and on. Football today is so intertwined with big money that big private investors and even some Gulf nations now own big stakes in football clubs. From being a working class game, football today is a game that is controlled by billionaires. And the numbers are simply staggering. Here are the top three teams in this world cup in terms of the net worth of their players. England is worth $1.3 billion, Brazil $1.2 billion, France over $1 billion. This massive concentration of money has made football a less competitive game. A few top teams now dominate all championships and only a few lucky players can hope to shine. It's a far cry from what football once was, a people's game. What do you think? Has the influx of big money made football a better game? Or has it made it a game only meant for the stars? That's the show today. Keep watching NewsClick, like our channel, subscribe to it as well. Do like this video which means you're to press that like button and share it with your friends.


of transformational leadership over transactional leadership and the ADC suspends 17 state chairman and appoints new BOT chairman. Well this is plus politics. I am Mary Anifor. Transformational leadership is a kind of leadership that inspires positive changes and those who follow transformational leaders and they are enthusiastic, generally energetic and passionate. Not only are these leaders involved in the process, they are also focused on helping every member of the team succeed as well and and by extension they're also helping the larger society. A leader of the national consultative front and political economist Patutomi had said that Nigerians need leaders and individuals who are restructured. He alluded that government does not have the best interest of Nigerians at heart. He said that youths still remain a pivot tool in rejigging the system and making democracy work and joining us live is Professor Patutomi. He's the national leader. He's the leader I beg your pardon of national consultative front. It's so good to have you join us Professor. Thank you. It's a great pleasure to be able to join you. Great. Let's start by looking at the tragic tree of leadership in Nigeria from when we started in 1999 what we call a democracy up until today 2022 as we get ready for 2023. How well have we done in terms of picking our leaders and the kind of leadership that we've gotten over the years? I made that to say extremely poorly. I mean sometimes we have tried hard to go the wrong way and have gotten lucky and other times we just haven't made the effort. And I'll explain what I said earlier and when I talk about President Umaru Musahira in a second. But I think it's important to understand what the difference is between transactional leadership and transforming or transformational leaders. One of the most defining conversations on this subject matter was offered by renowned American political scientists when I lived in the U.S. in the 1970s he was president of the American political science association. And his name is McGregor Barnes. James McGregor Barnes. His enormous volume on leadership, the book, that was simply leadership and makes quite an effort to you know do a typology of leaders and leadership. And he points to the fact that you can be a leader in terms of sets of transactions. You do this for me. I do that for you. And we work it out. Classic Nigerian leadership is transactional. You help me steal ballot boxes. I become governor. I help you get contracts. I help you. And this is really at the heart of my argument that it is impossible and I want to be quoted impossible almost for either the PDP or the APC to make Nigeria make progress that is sustainable. Why is this? The nature of the structure of the parties is such that inevitably it's about transactional leadership. Now in structural economics there is a paradigm that is called the structure conduct performance paradigm. The structure of an industry, for example, determines how the players in industry competes. That way they compete, which becomes culture, inevitably determines how they succeed, what kinds of success they enjoy. Now, in the case of transforming leaders, it is based on a certain vision and a certain value system that makes the people focus on this greater good, which the people might not even see, even though it's in their own best interest, but it might not be able to have the knowledge and the sheer force of capacity to see tomorrow to understand that it is in their interest. And this is why the ultimate transformation in examples of American study is Abraham Lincoln, I mean, derided, all kinds of things, sees a tomorrow in which the abolition of slavery and the rights of all peoples are elevated, leads the country down a path that Muslims did not believe in, but because he was a man who had shown commitment to the interest of the people, they were willing to suspend their disbelief in this thing that he's asking for. And to follow him down a path they did not quite understand. And when tomorrow came, the results became of value to all of them. That is what transforming leadership is about. If you look at Nigerian politics, especially since 1999, as different, significantly different from the founding fathers and what drove their interest in politics, you will see like the Awola wars, the Okparas, are transforming leaders. And you can see the impact in the free education that the Awola family introduced, or the competitive communalism that drove the response of the Sadawna and Okpara to some of his moves. So completely different from now where the transactions are such that, you know, it's me, myself and I. So what will you do for me? What will I do for you? By the end of it, you have reached a point where you're not even sure why government exists. It's just about what are these guys who have traded off one thing or the other? What are they looking for? What are they asking for? And if I may just dare to give the ultimate, for me personally, the ultimate example. I became quite friendly with General Muammar Dubuhari, not because of anything he had done in Nigeria, but because of a meeting in Jakarta in Indonesia in 1970, 1980, what was it? Anyway, 87. I was, most of my academic work in the later part of the 80s, Southeast Asia. In the process, I became very friendly with a group of economists in Indonesia, generally referred to as the Bekli Mafia. There were a group of economists dedicated at the University of California, Bekli, who became the leading light that showed the way that enables Suhato, President Suhato of Indonesia, to give Indonesia the kind of economy that we should have had that we couldn't get because of the kind of leaders we have had. Now, one of these economists used to be oil minister of Indonesia. His name was Muhammad Sadli, Professor Muhammad Sadli. And as part of my research, I spent a bit of time in the company of Professor Sadli. When I visited him in 1997, it was 1997, I saw that this man, a former oil minister of Indonesia, was living in a bungalow. He didn't even have air conditioning. He had big fans rotating, nice location on a hill in Jakarta. And I said to him, it's not normal for oil ministers, former oil ministers to live this modestly. And he said to me, but in your country, there's this young country of minister, when I was oil minister, his name was Muhammad Mubuwari. You know, he was a very ascetic guy and very expressing. And, you know, I mean, somebody like that should, so that gave me an interest in Mubuwari as a man who would be a fighter for rights, to reduce corruption and all of that. And I guess, General Mubuwari, yes. But here we are almost eight years. I'm so sorry, Professor Stockwell, are you? Here we are, eight years. That's the point I'm trying to make. Yeah. Here we are. Eight years down the line. And this man turns out to lead a government which, in my opinion, is just an opinion, is probably the most corrupt in Nigerian history. How does that happen? How does a man with that kind of background end up with what is probably the most corrupt government in Nigerian history? It's simple. It's the structure of the APC, the structure of the PDP, which leads to those kinds of transactions that inevitably leads a person like Wari to appoint the kind of people who are appointed to his cabinet. Who are the most corrupt people that I know? So you're telling me that Nigeria cannot make progress with those? So you're telling me, Professor, that no matter how well-intentioned a person is, no matter how much interest of the people he has or she has at heart and wants to lead this country, he or she would be unable to do that because of the APC and the PDP, no matter what platform the person runs on? If there are any kind of transactions that define the APC and the PDP, the outcome can only be negative. I can assure you of that. It's the outcome that gives you the kind of ministers you have today. So we need to find transforming leaders who recognize that a big vision is more important than those transactions that get them power. We need to be able to mobilize the people against those small interests that often lead people into power. And this is where we are today in Nigeria's history. Leaders who have put themselves through a grind that see tomorrow so clearly that they recognize that this machine cannot bring that tomorrow about. And in many ways, just by the hand of God, that's probably what God Peter would be out of that place because he finally saw that he couldn't make a transforming push within the structure of the PDP. And this is why what we try to do with the NCF in building a big tent, a coalition of civil society organizations, political parties that see Nigeria's future such that self-sacrificing people focused on the common good of all, state where they're going, and create a collegial approach through which the common good trumps power. I'm so sorry. Let me come in there. I like how you put that. But just as we said earlier on, this Peter B is one man and he's running on one political party who of course many have, many even in the opposition have said does not have a structure per se, one that could be compared to the big political parties. But he's one person. He wins election for instance. But then of course there is majority minority, national assembly, the upper house, the lower house. And of course we know how these things play out. It's a game of numbers. Again, I want to ask that question I asked earlier on. One person, a transformational leader trying to trump and bring about a change of, you know, as against the transactional kind of leadership. How does he thrive in that very chaotic circumstance? Yeah, Peter B is not one transformational leader. There is a college of actors and he just represents the face of it. Those actors include people like Guzman Bugadje, Itwai Godano, myself of course, and several others who have the meeting and talking about a transforming college of leaders that will then back one candidate to ensure that we get a new way of governing in Nigeria. This is what is happening. Peter B is just a vehicle to get Nigeria traveling the right direction. So that is possible only when thank God the people take ownership and recognize that what has been happening to them is not going to get them anywhere. And this is what I think has happened in Nigeria. The people have taken ownership. Don't forget that this whole thing is driven by the frustration of Nigerian businessmen, the anger of Nigeria's youth, the failure to see the progress Nigeria should make, take any indicator. Nigeria is at the bottom, literally at the bottom of just any indicator you can think. Why compared to our peers that don't have the factual endowments that we have, that don't have the human capital we have, it's clearly a leadership challenge. And the center of the problem is that it's leadership that is focused on transaction tradeoffs. You don't vote for me. I come and scrap the road that is in your neighborhood. You do this. You do that. Everything becomes me, myself, and I. Whereas the transforming leader doesn't even think of today, the things of the future. And what I see happening in Nigeria today, these transactional leaders are dividing Nigeria as much as they can. They are creating fake news. They are trying to dig up some stuff all kinds of sentiments that prevent Nigeria from going anywhere, just so they can have power. I think that until we can get people who think long-term and the greater good of all, we're going to find that we're going to be mud in these transactions that ultimately hold us back. What we need is a group of people, not just one person who are thinking transformation. And if they find a champion, that champion, whether it's Peter Obie or Itwai Godalo or whoever, that person then provides the arrowhead from which the country is taken back by the people. This is what Nigeria requires as it goes towards 2023. Great. Let me paint another scenario here. I'm sure that, of course, you live in this country, so you understand all the things that are happening. You've heard about the 40 billion pipeline surveillance allocation or rather contract to Tom Polo. Now, you've also heard about the all theft situation where the NNPCs are unable to account for how much crude or petrol that we're able to produce and how much we consume as a country. There's also that claim that there's a cartel that runs the oil sector. Mr. President, as you know, is the petroleum minister who sits at the helm of affairs, but there's a lot of corruption, not just in the oil and gas sector, but almost all across the country. So again, one hero, great idea, but there are so many cartels, might not just be that in the oil and gas sector. Can one man kick out all of these people? Because again, this is something that has grown over the years. How easy would it be for one transformational leader? Again, these guys are not going to let down easy, whoever they are. So how does one person, one hero in your words break the cycle? Especially for those who are not also politicians who are just, like you said, a college of people who want transformation. But what about the ones who are actively in politics? Let me tell you, in 2015, when General Buhari won the election, checks were measured. Corruption literally came to stop in Abuja. Everybody was scared of this guy coming. When, within a few months, they saw that his guys were as corrupt as anybody, they began to do what they were doing, and everything changed, and it got worse and worse and worse. The power of the example of the leader cannot be toyed with. If there's corruption anywhere, go and check the leader, his age, his family, if they are standing on the right. Anybody who goes your wrong way knows there's consequence. One of my favorite examples, of course, is Singapore. Lee Kuan Yew, you knew that Iblee caught you doing the wrong thing. No matter how close to him you were, you would go down. It was so bad that a minister who was very close to him was discussing a deal. He hadn't even negotiated the deal. He heard that he leaked, and he couldn't bear the possibility that Lee would hear about it. He committed suicide, he killed himself, just because he couldn't deal with the shame that Lee Kuan Yew would find out that he was publishing a deal. Another minister, he committed a real crime, but he went on vacation, the ticket was bought by a company, he promised them anything, no deal. He lost his job, he went to jail. This is what people were expecting to happen in 2015 when Buhari was elected. When it didn't happen, when his people began to put their fingers in every tail, people just dismissed the government as, oh, it's just another one. He couldn't do that because of the transactions nature of the politics that he had to trade off this with that to win the election. So leadership example is number one in stopping any wrong. And we were nearly there in 2015 until he couldn't exercise the leadership of his people, and Nigeria just went down the drain. Again, let's talk about, let's bring it down to the people. I'm also going to come to the judiciary and law enforcement, but let's talk about the people. The mindset, changing the mindset of people, whether it be for political reasons or for social reasons, can be, you know, is not walking the pack. And again, you started the conversation by, you know, talking about how we have seen or understood leadership from a transactional place. Now we're talking about people getting their PBCs. There's been that movement, but it's not enough, of course. What happens at the polling units? How do we drive that mindset of change? And you know what I mean by change? I'm not talking about the change that we were sold in 2015. I'm talking about the change that we need to change Nigeria. How do we drive that mindset? Because again, that can be a hard not to crack. So in your, I mean, in your way, how do we go about it so that we can have people not asking? Because we've seen it, even though some elections will be said there to be free and fair, we've seen people ask for monies at polling units because they think that that's the share of the national cake. Yes, because they are experiencing that they've seen nothing else and they are hungry. They've been made poor. The first thing is one leadership example. The second thing is ensuring that we create a society where people can have a good life. They can earn enough to be content to us of that kind of handout. So and then the third thing is education, education and education. The biggest thing Nigeria needs today is education. The thing that has been denied Nigeria the most is education. You saw the UNESCO numbers from last week. There are now 20 million out of school children in Nigeria. We have the worst, worst record in education in the world. It's no surprise that we are the poverty capital of the world. It's a surprise. It's typical Nigerian transactional politician actually has an investment stake in the poverty of Nigerian people because the poorer the people are, the easier it is to use nothing to entice them to sell their votes. And so all of the people who think clearly Nigeria must get together to prevent this from continue to happen. Massive voter education. This is part of the duty of INEC, which they are feeling at. Massive voter education. Can we really blame INEC alone because political parties also have a duty in educating, in voter education, but we don't see that happening. What we see mostly is of course the jaw-drawing and the mudslinging as opposed to educating the people they want to vote for them. But absolutely the reason that some of us have been traveling around talking about these things and we have that obligation to educate the people. And believe me, if you just take the miles of video of my talking on these matters, you will see how political leaders ought to act to be able to change mindsets and get a better tomorrow for everybody. Finally, let's talk about law enforcement and the judiciary. Many would say, I mean there's that comment saying that the judiciary is the last hope for the common man, but I don't know if we can still say that is the case today because it seems a lot of people have lost faith in our judicial system, maybe due to the slow pace of justice or many other things. But then also law enforcement on the other hand, we saw what happened in October of 2020 when Nigerians came out to talk about bad policing, et cetera, et cetera. How do we also get all of these hands on deck because we cannot have transformation if the judicial officers and law enforcement are not working hand in hand? Absolutely correct. As an institution, the rule of law, the judiciary, are critical to human progress. Institutions really shape how society makes progress in addition to values, your culture. I was joking a few weeks ago, I don't know why the bar association invited me back because I've hammered at the bar association for years about how they are failing in their duty to ensure the rule of law by acting in civil society, as civil society to ensure a better judicial system, to ensure the policing is better done. And so, I had one of two questions at the legal state, but I asked them enough that they started a group of lawyers, started from the call life, lawyers interested in free and fair elections. But it's civil society that has to keep organizing, and it buys a very critical part of it. I'd like to say that the immediate past president, Uluak Pata, did tremendous work in that regard. And I hope that his successor continues down that track. And look at Pakistan. When the Chief Justice of Pakistan was removed, the circumstances are almost similar to how our own Chief Justice was removed a few years ago. The lawyers went on the streets, they marched on the streets until that was reversed. So we need to really change the way that we approach these things so that Nigeria may make sustainable progress. Well, Professor Patutomi is the leader of National Consultative Front. Always a pleasure to have you and also have these kinds of conversations with you. Thank you, my pleasure. Well, thank you all for staying with us. We'll take a short break. When we get back, we'll be talking about, of course, the crisis within the ADC, and we'll be joined by the Chairman for Lagos. Stay with us.