 Welcome to the Knuckleheads of Liberty. It's funny, you know, it just seems like this is such an interesting time. I guess maybe a lot of the times have been kind of interesting in the last, you know, 50 or so years, but it just seems like it's been pretty extraordinary these last 5 or 10 years with the comfortableness that squelching free speech in the name of, you know, being concerned over certain words or other things like that. And just, you know, so it's really been one of those things where, at least for me, that's kind of brought my awakening, but it sounds like, you know, you had your awakening quite a long time ago on this stuff. Yeah, at the national level, the media has always been pretty much in for all to whoever is controlling the government at the time. During the 50s, 40s, 50s, 60s, media was pretty much owned by Republicans. And Republicans, for the most part, controlled most of the major media outlets one way or another. That's gradually changed over time as the Republicans lost their majorities in Congress back in the 50s, and the Democrats took over and also took over in the administrative, at the presidential level. The media kind of followed along, you know, in order to get access to the newsmakers. And if you have to do and say and ask the right questions in order to get access to the newsmakers, and if you have wrong questions or promulgate the wrong editorial beliefs, then, you know, you don't get the juicy interviews anymore. And so the media, knowing that they have to be able to cover the story, kind of plays along and gradually changes. So we've seen over my lifetime, I've seen a very gradual shift from a Republican-inspired media to a Democratic media in terms of where most of the reporters and most of the ownership is coming from. It's not a gradual shift, but it's always been the case that whoever controls the government, de facto controls what the media says. They don't do it through outright censorship, but they do it through limiting access to people that they don't think will give them the kind of coverage that they want to hear. I mean, I noticed at first in the 1990s, the 90s during the Clinton era, it was kind of a transition period. We had the advent of the drug report, the internet, the alternative media, which were not controlled by the government at the time. You had ABC, NBC, CBS that controlled pretty much everything that you heard on television. You had the New York Times and the Washington Post and the Associated Press that pretty much controlled anything that got any national coverage as far as print is concerned. And the radio stations were, for the most part, simply following whatever the networks, ABC, NBC, CBS said or what AP said. They didn't do a whole lot of original reporting themselves. So in effect, the government controlled, de facto controlled what the media said. And I heard Hillary Clinton complain about Drudge during the Monica Gaye episodes. She complained, we don't have any intermediaries anymore. We don't have anybody that can essentially squelch what is going on over the internet. That was a complaint to Ferds. We don't have the control over the media that we used to have. And she thought that was absolutely terrible and that kind of opened up my eyes to what was going on as far as the government having de facto control of what the media says. It's not like Tass or Pravda in the Soviet Union, but it tends in that direction. Well, perhaps that's who's pulling Biden's strings on this disinformation board, right? To try to get that media. Over the last, I don't know, 10 years or so, certainly since the Trump era, the media, the social media, which for the most part were pretty much free for all. Anybody could voice their opinion. Anybody could put whatever heterodox opinion out there that they want to do on Facebook, on YouTube, on Twitter, etc. Very, very, very clearly and kind of softly at first, but then very much, very much, obviously, government said, hey, you can't be saying all of these things. You can't be doing all of these things that we don't agree with. And the way they were able to make their influence felt was to call Zuckerberg into the congressional hearings, the heads of the other primary internet social media corporations, bringing them all in front of congressional hearings, giving them the third degree, and implicitly threatening regulation of the internet. And very effectively, they brought them into line. They said, the internet company said, we're going to have to censor ourselves or we're going to be censored. And that's what you saw happen. And of course, with the removal of Trump from Twitter and the leftward tilt of the social media companies over the last 5, 10 years, it's become more and more obvious that the conservative voices can't be heard except on non-mainstream media for sure, and internet more and more so. You know, there are places like Parler and others that are fighting back. But the largest thing to remember is it's really not that much difference between what you're hearing when the Republicans were in control and when the Democrats are in control. You just hear a little bit of a different nuance. The main message is the same. Trust us. Do as we say. Don't rock the boat. We are in charge. We will do the right thing. Don't question us. That's what Republicans said back in the 50s and 60s. And that's what Democrats have been saying ever since. And they're both buying. So where do you place your typical podcast that would be media that you would access through Apple iTunes or Apple Podcasts or Google Podcasts or any of those other methods to organize your podcast? Well, you know, podcast are one area where anything goes still. The problem is getting the podcast heard or watched. And for many years, Libertarian Counterpoint went on YouTube and there was a Libertarian Counterpoint channel. And if you went to the search bar on YouTube and a Libertarian Counterpoint and you'd be able to see every show that had ever been done, ranked by viewers, ranked by whatever, you know, most recent posting and so forth. It was really easy to find Libertarian Counterpoint. In the last couple of years, I've noticed when I want to go look at the most recent show or whatever, I have to actually put Libertarian Counterpoints in quotes in order to get it to come up at all on YouTube. Otherwise, I get a bunch of garbage. So YouTube has changed their algorithms to make it more and more difficult for the uninformed audience to find us. And that's true with all kinds of podcasts. If your audience knows to find you, it's still out there. But if your audience doesn't know where to find you, the internet giants are making it more and more difficult for anything other than mainstream kind of stuff. And by mainstream, I mean really kind of liberal-slanted, left-of-center, if you want to call it that way. That's the only thing that's getting promoted at this point. So it seems that as far as those podcasts go, it's more difficult now to find them because you don't really know where they are. You're not a subscriber, let's say. But what about for somebody that's a subscriber to a particular podcast? And let's pick Google, as is your example, since you used it before, about finding something you didn't really, you know, maybe you'd heard about it or something you're just kind of searching for it, but you're not a subscriber. So let's say now you go one step further and you found this libertarian-based podcast and you subscribed to it. Wow, I really like this. I want to see this all the time. Is the algorithms at Google even hiding those from people that are subscribers today? I'm not an internet guru enough to answer that question. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness always and forever.