 I don't think that is this. That's not a question of protecting powerful people. It means when you have information that would be very damaging to a particular politician or business executive, and you choose not to print it. Even though you know it is correct, that's wrong. Now, I did have, when I mentioned when I was covering national security, for instance, I discovered it had to do with an operation in Iraq. And it was a pretty good scoop I had. And the White House came and said, if you print this, you will put American soldiers' lives at risk. Because the people that we are about to attack don't know we're going to attack. So we debated that at the Washington Post. What do we do with that? Do we honor that request, or do we not? And ultimately, we agreed to not run the story at that moment, but to publish it in the middle of the night just as the operation was set to begin. So therefore, I still had my exclusive scoop. But it didn't, in some way, tip off the people who were, as part of that operation. So different from protecting powerful people. It's just protecting a policy issue. Well, right. And I didn't want to have, tip off someone that could hurt an American military soldier.