 So, how are reporters in the corporate sector talking about cyber security? I think that actually one of the most remarkable things is that they are talking about it because several years ago no one was talking about this at all. The media didn't think it was a real story, companies were very worried about talking about it or they just didn't consider it to be a big issue and we've seen a huge evolution in fact in the last year or so we now see media's almost saturation of these types of issues and for companies we're starting to see them incorporating cyber security calculations into all aspects of their business planning and this is a pretty major shift. If you want to take a look a few years back in 2008 I remember that year well because I had recently joined the Wall Street Journal and I joined from the Baltimore Sun where I had been covering a lot of issues around NSA and thought this cyber thing was kind of cool and I was trying to get my editors interested in this and it was really a year long campaign. It took about two months to get what I thought was a fairly simple story about the intelligence agencies warning corporate executives not to bring devices to the Beijing Olympics because they might get compromised. It took two months to get that in the newspaper. Why? Because I needed a real example of a real person who went to China and got their device compromised before we could put it in the newspaper because our editors weren't sure that this was a real thing and so you know we kind of we went through this over this wasn't a front page story this wasn't a big deal this was like you know 800 words inside the paper but it was you know it took a lot of shall we say education. And you know one thing that kind of spurred this along was actually the end of 2008 the Los Angeles Times had a rather groundbreaking story about the infiltration of the classified computer system at central command and that started to show not just editors and the media certainly the federal government as well that this was a real issue that they really did need to be grappling with. We moved on to 2009 this was actually a pretty significant year from the perspective of the media's focus on this issue because the media really started to look at cyber security primarily through the lens of national security. At the Wall Street Journal we started looking at issues like Chinese and Russian surveillance of the electronic systems controlling the US electrical grid and later on infiltrations into the Pentagon's largest weapons system the Joint Strike Fighter and actually one of my personal favorites the unencrypted drone feeds in Iraq being intercepted by Iranian-backed militants in Iraq. But it wasn't just the journal the New York Times also did a really extensive coverage of cyber warfare they did a big long series on that and we really started to see a lot of media discussion around these issues but it was really just through the national security lens. That changed in 2010 and 2011 when our friends with Anonymous started to bring this issue home particularly in the private sector. They started out taking down the websites of PayPal and Visa and Mastercard in retaliation for those organizations withdrawing their support from WikiLeaks and then they moved on to what some might have seen as rather obscure entities. There was a contactor called HB Gary Federal but the CEO of this company had declared publicly that he was going to expose members of Anonymous and Anonymous decided to retaliate ahead of time and broke into his company systems and stole his emails and displayed them on the internet and creating multiple scandals that ultimately led to his resignation. And I think that for at least those in the private sector who were paying attention at the time that was something of a wake-up call. I think that was probably the biggest wake-up call for companies because that was the advent of the destruction of data that we saw with the Saudi Aramco hacks that were, it appears to be by Iranian hackers and the destruction of data on 30,000 computers I think did start to get the attention. We already kind of had the attention in the media but corporate entities started to realize that this wasn't just a national security issue. This was something that they were going to need to pay attention to as well. It looked like actually 2013 was going to be kind of a tipping point for cyber security because we had all kinds of big stories at the beginning of the year. The New York Times did a huge story about its own infiltration. I'll say that I was actually at the Wall Street Journal reporting our own hack and our editors finally sort of quietly acknowledged to me after the New York Times story ran that the journal had its own issue but in a display of how difficult a time companies sometimes have talking about these issues, they said, okay, go ahead and report the story like you'd report any other story. So the New York Times had this huge thing where all of the forensics experts had cooperated and I just had to go and try to have some off-the-record conversations with editors at the paper and find a way to kind of pull a story together. I couldn't even get the company to submit even the slightest acknowledgment if this might have happened until I think about four o'clock that afternoon, it was sort of a half admission that we had been hacked. But 2013 was also big because the government started talking about it. They started blaming China for cyber hacking events and things like that. And it was an issue that was really gaining momentum kind of on all fronts. And then Edward Snowden presented his whole, and that really switched the conversation over to surveillance. But I think that actually what was so surprising about that was most many people in Washington thought that cyber was going to be kind of off the radar screen for quite some time but it only took about six months. And I think that that's because it was an issue that was kind of ripe. With the advent of Target, we certainly saw this issue brought home to not just the media which covered it extensively but to CEOs. And I think that what caught the CEOs and board of directors' attention in the case of Target was that the media started covering this not just as any other hack but they were really looking at how the company was handling it. And I think that the shift that we've seen in the conversation in the media coverage has gone not just from the existence of a breach because we now sort of see that as commonplace especially after 2014. It's Target, it's JPMorgan, it's obviously now Sony, Home Depot, a whole host of others that people have kind of forgotten about. But the media really is now focused on how companies are handling it. And I think that actually creates a real opportunity for companies and perhaps not surprisingly companies are starting to realize that. They're realizing that there's actually an upside in being a little bit proactive on an issue that they now consider to be somewhat inevitable. It's not really if but. And that actually explains as well some of the reasoning behind why I recently switched positions from the media sector over to the corporate world in consulting and communications that I saw that company attitudes were starting to shift. And companies really were new ways to try to figure out, okay, we have all this data. How do we use it well? How do we become good stewards of this kind of data? And sometimes how do we talk about it? And I think that we're really starting to see through sort of the confluence of the media and companies becoming a little more sophisticated about both talking about the issue and thinking about the issue, new ways to start to address these things a little more proactively. Thanks.