 You know, we saw these sclerotic sometimes corrupt institutions that had all this trust and we kind of ripped the, you know, the facade off and showed people that there were these huge flaws. And I think I've seemed great, like what's the downside to that and now find ourselves in a world where all the institutions are in trouble. I mean, I don't think there's actually all that media specific. I think there's a decline across institutions and you can get very focused on like, did the New York Times do something wrong? What it is a global sort of cross broad base. Yeah, but I think this moment of technological shift and it turns out I think having trusted institutions is probably pretty valuable. And you look at, I mean, COVID was a good example. Countries like, you know, Australia and South Korea that had really highly trusted institutions seem to have done better than. But yeah, well, we could get into that. But in the United States, we would be right not to trust the institution, right? But here's the thing and the tricky thing. When I'll speak about media, which is like the one I know best, which is we were always right not to trust them. Like, I mean, I was in, we were, I was in newsrooms in, you know, the late 90s. I was in and, and, you know, you could like, I was covering cops in Indianapolis in 1999. And, you know, there would be a shooting and we would have the wrong name of the shooter, the wrong name of the victim, go knock on the wrong door, be running around like total idiots all day. And by the end of the day would have sorted some of that stuff out. And the story that was published the next day would actually be mostly accurate, but occasionally inaccurate and would correct. But now, but that all we were all, you know, but now we, you know, a shooting happens and journalists are running around like idiots trying to have the wrong name and the wrong this and the wrong that and trying to sort it out. And people are like, Jesus, you guys are such idiots. But of course we were always idiots. It's just like now you can see it, right? And I think that's true of a lot of these institutions. And so that's how you create a kind of trust when people can actually see what idiots you are. Well, when you own the mistakes, right? Yeah. And when you can't create this kind of mystique that was never really justified. So let me ask you two questions that relate to Buzzfeed. Part of what we talked about where you guys debunk the mega story, which is that Russian interference in the 2000 election, particularly in places like Facebook, that's what tipped, you know, the balance to Trump who, you know, one with less than 47% of the popular vote, squeaked in, you guys debunk that. But that seems to be a very strong narrative that people still kind of persist in believing. Yes. But then you also made the decision to publish the Steele dossier, which was originally compiled by people who were related to Hillary Clinton's campaign or was used in that term. Most of this annual remember the Steele dossier was the source of the idea that there was a the p-tape of Donald Trump, which I hope for God, even if it's true, it never sees the light of day because I already have nightmares. But, you know, can you talk a little bit about like most of the Steele dossier has been debunked? Yeah. What went into your decision-making to say, okay, we're going with this? And then what's the effect of something like that on trusted media? That's a good question. I think, you know, I certainly came to that decision and in general to, you know, with like the sort of Gawker mindset in a way that we should be saying to our audience the same thing we're saying to each other, that it seems crazy that you and I would have a conversation and then a lawyer, a doctor, a teacher, a construction worker who was in our audience would say, hey, what are you talking about? We'd be like, sorry, you're not smart enough to understand this. And so when we got the dossier, and a lot of journalists have been given the dossier by, it was compiled by actually at that time very well regarded former British spy involved in the FIFA investigations and knew a lot of journalists from that. There's a fantastic book about all of this, too, which is worth reading whose name, of course. Barry Meyer? Yeah. Yeah, great book. And so we like, I think, everybody else. We got the dossier later and threw a weird side door, and so we weren't bound to secrecy. But also we did what I think everybody else did. We sent a reporter to Prague to see if she could figure out if Michael Cohen had been there. She went from hotel to hotel showing his picture. And it's amazing. People at hotels, I guess in Prague, at least, will just check their guest registry for you. Wow. If you're sort of a charming, friendly young reporter, apparently. And went to Moscow to talk to see if anybody at the Ritz-Carlton would discuss this with us. And I think, you know, I was already thinking like, huh, at some point we should, every journalist in Washington has seen this thing, all the intelligence officials, a lot of the senators, Harry Reid has written an open letter to James Comey saying, he knows that Comey has compromising information on Trump, demanding he release it. McCain is acting super weird in a way that you don't really understand unless you know about this. So at some point you're kind of like, this is like, this is the dark matter of Washington and everyone is in on it except for the reader. It's hard to explain what's going on, actually, without some reference to it. And it's starting to bleed into the public a little. And so we're thinking about like, how do we cover it? And then this is where it wasn't really like this grand principle. Like there's a very specific thing that happens, which is CNN reports that this previously secret document has been briefed to two presidents, to the President Obama and President-elect Trump, and that it is full of, and that it alleges that Trump was compromised by the Russians. And at that point to me, it's like I'm holding in my hands a list of suspected communists of the State Department. Like you can't show the document. You cannot report on it, which is where we were, but you can't show it and then say, but it'll burn your eyes out if you look at it. I just think that's not a tenable position, so that's why we published it.