Owlspotting

Citizen Journalism @ We Media

A discussion moderated by Dan Gillmor, featuring Lex Alexander (Greenboro News & Record), Susan DeFife (Backfence) and J.B. Holston (Newsgator).

Gillmor: Is “big media” getting it?

Alexander (Greensboro News & Record): To the extend media organiztaion of any size are really listening, the closer they are. Where we got off to a good start was after we came up with the germ of the idea, we asked our readers how this should look, work etc. Nine months later we’re still working through suggestions. We started after less than two months of discussion and at a moment when the budget had been decided. The bottom line is that if you’re not engaging in coversation about content and the way this content is made available — you might have hardware — but it won’t work.

Gillmor: What works?

Alexander: The blogging facet has gotten the most response. We now have 18 staff blog. They were generating close to 700,000 hits a months, about 1/10 of the hits on our site. In some cases we have hundreds of comments — typically we get 2-4-8. The K12 education blog gets a lot of participation. The top editors blog gets a fair bit of comment.

Gillmor: Susan, can you do it from scratch and start conversations?

DeFife (Backfence.com) We did start from scratch. We looked at where the gaps are, focused on communities (50,000 to 75,000) and it’s completely citizen generated. We were mostly concerned with the interface — wanting to make them feel like they are e-mailing a friend. There is demand for hyper-local news, what people need is a platform. We trust the intelligence of a user and their ability to express themselves.

Gillmor: Can you be hyper-local at the neighborhood level?

DeFife: Sure you can. First you have to introduce the idea of citizen produced and posted.

Gillmor: Is there a business.

DeFife: Yes. Around this we have display advertising, classifieds and Yellow Pages.

Gillmor. J.B., who needs media organizations? Is there a complete bypass going on?

Holston (Newsgator): We talk about that a lot with our media customers. My answer depends on brand equity. If you’re a newspaper and you know that local news is what you’re all about, the traditional brands have a tremendous role to play.

Question: The technical skills are becoming more important to the reporting… How much is technology a problem for you?

DeFife: You have to know and understand your audience. Here’s why don’t do RSS — less than five percent of users do RSS; less in our community. The reason we built a new platform is because the user doesn’t know what blogs and wikis are — we just wanted to give them a white window that looks like e-mail.

Question: In what way are you trying to make sure that whatever the public wants includes what the public needs.

DeFife: You can’t make that judgement.

Alexander: If you’re listening to the community, they’ll tell you what matters. Your citizens will find what’s important to them before your staff does.

DeFife: We’re not going to replace investigative journalism. We want to create conversation. We are not journalists — we are letting the community ask the question.

Tag: wemedia

We Media conference, continued.

Jay Rosen (PressThink): We’ll talk about our sites. Earlier, Gore had something in his speech for everyone. The world I grew up in was mostly hierarchical. All our ideas, inluding all our aspiratins were based on a pattern of vertical atomized mass distribution. This was a pattern of mind. Along comes the Internet which unleashes horizontal energy. Here we have three sites, and I’ll introduce them and talk about our sites.

Patrick (I Want Media): My site was launched five years ago. I launched it because I thought it could promote some freelance writing I was doing. I was at Hearst, where I tracked down a lot of information about the media. I thought it’d be helpful if there was a site that aggregated all of this. The part that took off was headline aggregation. I try to cover a little bit of journalism, a little bit of technology etc.

Rosen: When did you realize you had some power?

Patrick: Maybe when Insight wanted to buy me. We were talking back and forth and while doing this, they folded.

Rosen: Jessica… you’re at Columbia, and you get to write for Gawker…

Jessica Cohen (Gawker): Gawker is a classic web log format. When I took the job I knew it launched the previous two editors to good jobs. Gawker is the silly aggregation of what you need to know. It’s equal high and low — from rumbles and big deal news to Nick & Jessica. Gawker: if you got a bunch of journalists drunk, what would they be talking about? If you were the journalist getting drunk, you wouldn’t put it out. But I can do it. We’re insiders, but outsiders.

Rosen: How do you do your site?

Patrick: I’m sure I don’t get as many e-mails and hits like Gawker. People that e-mail me want to be credited for their work.

Cohen: I’ve had NY Times reporters e-mail me to make fun of their stories so they can knock Frank Rich off the most e-mailed items list. A lot of what you see on the site comes from the e-mail tipster. I get probably 1,000 e-mails a day. It’s completely dynamic.

Rosen: Jessica, when did you feel you had mastery to write for Gawker?

Cohen: It took me about three months to feel comfotable with everything. Four months into it I felt like I had ownership.

Rosen: I started my blog because I was tired of filtering my ideas through the minds of journalists. I had written for CJR, The Nation, but I never got around the problem of filtering what I knew through a narrow gatekeeper — the journalist. When I learned of blogging, I knew this was for me. The reason was, I wanted to go around and speak directly to who might be interested. I asked people what works and they all had one thing in common: write short. That’s what the style is, that’s what works etc. I knew I was going to disobey that. My blog is an exercise in de-control of ideas. It’s one of the sites that sprung up to look at the media, gossip about it, examine it etc. I’m now writing about the breakup between Judy Miller and the New York Times, and NY Times people are e-mailing me, telling me to keep it up. In this media world, the Times can’t control the narrative.

Tag: wemedia

>>> Paidcontent.org has Al Gore’s speech available for download as a podcast.

Third discussion: We Inc.

Jason McCabe Calcanis (moderator, WebLogs Inc.). Scott Rafer (Chairman, Wireless Inc.), Craig Forman (VP & GM, Yahoo!), Jennifer Feikin (Director, Google Video), Andrew Heyward (President, CBS News).

Heyward: There is a danger of over-simplyfying and it’s bad the VP left. But we have an empty chair representing him. What Gore said is fairly common cricisism.

Calcanis: Do you think bloggers are now what 60 Minutes used to be?

Heyward: There is still great work done on television. 60 Minutes is still the no.1 news magazine. One misunderstadings about conglomerates is that they are actively telling us what to cover. That is not true. There is still a firewall. The issue, as the VP said, are the sins of omission. But if there wasn’t the marketplace for the runaway bride it won’t be on as much as it is. The Interent is exciting because you are not stuck with a linear medium.

Rafer: The takeaway from the VP’s talk is not to exaggerate the effect we’re already having. We’re not touching too many people yet. Most importantly, we’re more likely to touch people in the higher socio-economic bracket. The issue we face is that people ar enot able to find the tools to hear individual voices and it’ll be 10-15 years until that is going to change. There is no market efficiency; the FCC is the biggest source of corporate welfare. In an analog world there is a limit to bandwith, but that’s not true for Wi-Fi.

Calcanis: Yahoo, are you a content company or not?

Forman: The good old days are always good and old. Present is horrible. Future is great. That’s what is always been said. So I take from Gore’s speech that it was a better world when just a few people owned presses. I look at today and I say to myself “this has just begun.” We are looking to do two things: on the user side there is an openess to find what is out there, find what’s interesing. The other thing is a shift to My Media — users control. So we’re doing all things you described — we create content (such as Hotzone) and we create experiments. We are creating the tools and the ability for people to share their own content. During London, what struck me most was Flickr — which became a self-organizing pool of creative photojournalism. The community created a set of tags, which allowed others to see what was going on.

Feikin: If you look at the Internet, the WWW has been around for 15 years. What has happened in the past 15 years, it’s been pretty phenomenal. Look at search engines — they provide insight that previously wasn’t available. News reports have been broken on the Internet. User-generated content is the next level.

Heyward: The faustian bargain of the mainstream media is having to achieve commerciality to survive. To do good, you need to do well. You could buy content online, but right now the distribution is weak. In Internet news there are few journalistic stars or succesful storyteling models.

Forman: The Internet has not shown the traditional qualities of print and broadcast reporting, such as enterprise reporting. Probably because it’s still new. For people under the age of 40 the definition of news has changed: it can be breadth, depth, accuracy in real time and “respect my intelligence.” It’ll be interesting to see how this develops.

Calcanis: You said the Internet is not telling compelling stories, but what about PaidContent?

Forman: But what PaidContent is doing is the same thing as traditional reporting. It’s breaking news delivered in a compelling way.

Calcanis: Intergration between the news and online divisions…

Heyward: If someone would try to blog and give their opinions, we’d discourage that. But our reporters accepted the challenge to report for the Web — it’s been a huge succes. When you move to editorializing, that’s not what I’d like to want our reporters to do.

Calcanis: A lot of people believe blogosphere is succesful because audience is not buying the idea of objectivity…

Rafer: Editorial bias has always been a fact. What is more important is reputation. There is bias on PaidContent regarding how the blogosphere is growing, but Rafat’s got a great reputation. The best of the writers on the blogospheres are the folks with a reputation for saying: “here is my position and here are the facts wrapped around it.” The reptation is something a lot of people can come to a general concurrence on. Bias is going to exist.

Calcanis: So transparency leads to a better product?

Forman: For me is about authenticity. There will continue to be a premium on authentic speech on deeply views, news and opinion. When you’re a journalist, you have tremendous duties or responsabilities. When you’re an individual it’s not like that.

Tag: wemedia

Al Gore, Tipper Gore and their son Albert are seated at my table across from me. Now Al is at the podium.

Gore: I used to be the next president of the United States. In 1972 I was a graduate of an API seminar of investigative reporters. It was pre-Watergate, and I was working for the Tennesean. I will never forget it — the main reason is the other young investigative journalists that were there.

We spent the time discussing whether investigative reporting was dead. The best evidence was that Woodward and Berstein had done great work on the Watergate story but nothing was happening. I’ve written my speech down and I’ll share it.

I came here today because I believe in the purposes of the conference — and because I truly believe American democracy is facing a great danger — a danger hard to describe in words. It is no longer possible to ignore the strangeness of our public discourse. I know I’m not the only that feels that something has gone terribly wrong in the way the market place of ideas functions.

I wonder how many of you have remarked that American has entered an alternate universe. I thought for example that it was an aberation when 3/4 of American reported Saddam was responsible for 9/11. Here we are now and 1/3 to 1/2 still believe that. It’s strange. At first I thought the OJ Simpson trial was just an unfortunate excess of our television media. But now with the perspective of time we know it was a prelude to today’s obsessions.

Third examples. Are Americans still torturing helpless prisoners? Does it feel normal that American citizens don’t express outrage? Does it feel right that we don’t have any discussions on it. Or, if the gap between rich and poor is widening and low income people are getting strined, why is apathy increasing among us. That seems strange.

Or — on the eve of the invasion of Iraq, Robert Byrd (D-WV) asked why the senate chamber was empty. The decision under consideration turned out to be a faithful one. Even if you believe this was a wise policy, Sen. Byrd’s question is valid. He was saying in effect — here we are on eve of war and nobody is talking about it. That’s strange, isn’t it? Aren’t we supposed to have viorous debate? Those of us that served in the Senate could volunteer answers, The Senate was silent because senators have come to feel that what they say doesn’t matter. And it was empty because senators were in fun raisers trying to find money for 30-second television ads.

In the aftermath of Katrina there was a vividness and clarity to the public discourse. There was a time when America’s public discourse was vivid and clear. The Founders used words with astonishing precision. Their faith in representative democracy rested on the faith of an informed citizenry and they tried to protect the marketplace of ideas.

Their world was dominated by the printed word. The U.S. in its first half century knew nothing but the world of print. They spoke in paragraphs. They could not imagine that America’s public discourse would consist of anything but words in print.

Today, newspapers are hemoraging readers. Reading itself is in sharp decline. The republic of letters has been invaded and occupied by other media. It is television that still completely dominates the flow of information. Americans now watch television an average of 4 hours and 28 minutes, second only to Japan. That’s almost 3/4 of the discretionary time Americans have.

The Internet is a formidable new medium — exciting, dynamic and hopeful, but it still does not hold a candle to television. People are simultaneously watching television while they are online.

The most prominent casualty of television was the marketplace of ideas. It’s not that we don’t share ideas, but the public forum has been grossly distorted beyond recognition. It is this that accounts for the current strangeness.

The reality of public debate was considered central to democracy. The public forum was where the people held the government accountable. The three chracateristics of this marketplace of ideas were these:

– open to every individuals with no barriers for entry, save literacy.
– the faith of ideas depended on an emergent meritocracy of ideas. Those judged to be good, rose to the top.
– the accepted roles of discoursed assumed participants had to search for general agreement.

What resulted was a startling development — knowledge mediated. The demonstration was a form of communication developed in the 1960s — manly to capture the interest of television. There is virtually no exchange of ideas in television. That’s what Current TV is trying to do. It’s important to know that the lack of exchange on television, it’s a rigged market that excludes the public.

The movie “Network” proved to a prophecy. The news divisions which used to be seeing as serving a public interest are now advancing the larger agenda of corporations: fewer reporters, more dependance on handouts, less independence etc. The journalists today are probably more skilled than ever, but they are not allowed to do the job they’ve been trained for.

I teach at Middle Tennessee. One of my colleagues, a conservative Republican made a comment that was misinterpreted as being critical of the U.S. The student called a radio host who put the word to other hosts. Within two hours, the president of the university had a stack of messages demanding the professor be fired immediately. That kind of routine activity inspires a climate of fear — facts become battlegrounds. Questions of truths as a philosopher once said, become questions of power.

The U.S. press was found to be the 27th freest press in the world — that too seems strange to me. The coverage of political campaigns focuses on the horse race and little else. One of the things red and blue state Americans agree on is that they don’t trust the news media.

The subjugation of news by entertainment leads to disfunctional journalism that fails to inform them people. And when they are not informed, they cannot hold the government accountable. The main form of communication between politicians and the public are now the 30-second ads.

I’m trying to work in TV to re-create a multiway conversation. It may well be that the public would also benefit by changes in policy. We are succeding by reaching out and asking people to co-create our network. The purpose is a better informed public.

Current TV relies on the Internet for video streaming for video-created content. We also rely on the Internet to discuss programing with our viewers.

I want to close with the two things I learned about Internet:

1. As exciting as it is, it still lacks what TV has; because of packet-switching architecture and reliance on wide-variety of connections, it still does not support the real-time mass distribution of video. As higher bandwith connections expand, the Web’s capacity to carry TV will improve. But, it is television — for the remainder of this decade and the next — that will be the prime medium of communication. Democracy is at great risk.

2. We must ensure Internet is open and accesible to all citizens. We cannot take this future for granted. We must be prepared to fight for it. Some of the forces that destroyed the TV marketplace are interested in taking over the Internet. We must assure this medium develops in the mold of the original marketplace of ideas.

> The Media Center blog has links to others blogging and podcasting the conference. Check them out here.

Tag: wemedia.

>> Second discussion at the We Media conference in New York.

Farai Chideya (had a career in all media, from newsmagazines to television to radio. Now she works in LA for NPR): I finally feel that there is some convergence — to use a word that is totally dead. There is no real separation between the media at this point. I’m always going to take photos and upload them onto NPR’s Web site. There isn’t going to be any sylo-media. I’m trying to figure out how to best serve my audiences. How do you grow without losing our core competency?

(There is a slide show of pictures and video shot by citizens; including a video of the tsunami striking South East Asia)

Larry Kramer (CBS): The entire CBS news operation works for the Web site. We created Public Eye, a blog. The concept behind what we’re doing is treating news more like a loop. Stories don’t end when they’re printed or broadcast. People can respond more than ever today. We wanted to let people respond to what we’re doing. Conversation with the general public creates a more relevant newscast. We still don’t take someone’s information and post it — we are using traditional media standards.

Richard Sambrook (BBC): If we don’t embrace technology we’ll use the audience. BBC is publicly funded and has an advantage over private organizations and we can focus on innovation. We experimented in areas of social media but the interesting thing is that in the past 4-5 month, these issues moved quickly to center stage. London was an example — we got images and e-mails on a scale we’ve never seen before. It dictated the tone and line of the coverage.On the day following the bombing we ran with a package of video phone clips. The BBC is moving towards being a facilitator.

Farai: Popandpolitics.com (which she worked on) is all about We Media — audience weighing in on all sorts of issues. At NPR the relationship is different — we still can’t take audio files from the listeners.

Tom Curley (AP): There’s an opportunity that didn’t exist before. All AP photographers have two camera bodies: one costs $8,000, the oher $900. We intend to stay in a business to business model and intend to stay focused on news.

Merrill Brown: What’s next for AP?

Curley: We started ASAP, a reverse publishing model — start with the Web and then let content trickl down. There are a lot of ways of getting content and letting it out.

Brown: Where is CBS going to go in terms of involving viewers?

Kramer: We’re watching technology. Having Andy Rooney on a podcast is quite new. We have embraced the idea of communicating on multiple platforms and we’re doing it with the same journalistic minds that work for television. The blog is in fact our first toe in the water. Leslie Moonves has an enormous respect for content — he has been willing to pay for the best content we can get. News is the same — we want to provide the very best content we can. Like London — some of the best content in real-time might not be produced by us.

Sambrook: This is a fundamental realignment between traditional media and the public. We are accountable to a degree that we haven’t seen before. When news is democratized like this, what is the role of the news organization? Part of it is having a facilitating role. Part of it is verification — the brand of the organization tells you we’ve vetted it and organized it in a certain way.

Brown: How do you hange the way you look at news?

Sambrook: It’s about re-organizing ourselves for a digital nvironment. We have to think differently about content. We believe “on-demand” is the future — we have to think about content in a 360 degree way.

Brown: How do you make that happen? Is it about training? Management?

Sambrook: It’s a huge cultural chance and you have to ensure the body of the BBC gets what is happening. Events like 7/7 make it clear that things have changed.

Brown: How do you get CBS to embrace this?

Kramer: It starts at the top — the executives need to be behind it. We weren’t into the real time news business. For our journalists, the 24-hour cycle sounded exciting. We were focused on the vening show, but we sold the advantages to them. The political team that had a hard time getting on the air, can produce more and be seen more.

Brown: That’s more filling and more deadlines. What about getting CBS involved with public?

Kramer: Well, we do. Now you can spend more time on a story or publishing longer story. The hours they shoot for a two-minute interview can be run much longer on the Web.

Brown: Tom, tell us the inside story?

Curley: You have to walk in and show what’s in it for them: new opportunity, more access to byline. We made a big change here. For 150 years we filed for newspapers. Now we file for the fast-track (online) first. The staff for the most part understands it and gets it.

Brown: What is AP doing to get the team engaged with the public?

Curley: Two things. One we’re enabling the blogging effect. We set that up to make it available. For our biz-to-biz model — we are looking to set up access to enable people to set things up their own way.

Brown: What is happening in matters on cultural change at NPR?

Farai: I was just in DC meeting with people. I met with people doing the original podcasting. NPR is adding staff. NPR has an opening for a music editor for online, a really exciting job. I was so excited when I came to NPR because I am a digital photographer and you can do slide shows. For NPR the way we get input is handing out tape recorders to some people (we did it with Katrina). We take the material and edit it ourselves. I don’t expect people to do a full fledged radio piece but you can produce a middle-ground. With Pop and Politics I knew that most people my age will not watch CNN’s political coverage. So I started peer-to-peer journalism, young people writing for young people. With Katrina — I was in the lower Ninth Ward and saw opportunities. With Pop and Politics we’re going to look for people, create a community and produce content. It breaks my heart that the digital era might mean digital exclusion.

Tag: wemedia

Note: The comments below are for the most part paraphrases.

Andy Carvin from the Center for Media & Community is blogging from the front row at the table that I’m sitting. He is taking pictures and video with an A40 and uploading from an IMac. You can read his stuff at www.andycarvin.com.

>> Opening discussion

Chris Willis / We Media: People turned from being browsers to being creators — and participating in all types of communities. Not everyone wants to be a citizen journalist but they are looking for ways to participate in the stories. There is no one-size fits all solution. Building the blog, the wiki etc. might work for one community but not might work the next.

Andrew Natchinson / The Media Center: We watched a gradual transition — we see the Internet playing a larger role. After London and Katrina we are not thinking of the Internet itself but the variety of pespectives we’re exposed to which transcends media. In Katrina, a tapestry of voice — from our standpoint that hints at where we’re heading It’ nt the rise and dominanance of blogs or RSS or podcast — it’s the diversity of options and voices which are going to become the norm.

Andy Carvin: As Katrina made landfall I wanted to set up a blog for everyone, even those without experience. Involved with tsunami, but that was a lot of work. Set up a blogger.com blog, but posted login privileges to the site and the e-mail so it could be used by anyone. We also set on accounts on Flickr — and RSSed back on the blog. We did what bloggers do, but let everyone have access and we got amazing content in a short amount of time.

Willis: That’s what we need to build for. Not everyone wants to be the journalist but you need to create the architecture of participationg (Tim O’ Reilly). Wiki News — anonymous people from all over the world create stories. The Wiki allows people to be fact-checkers, copy-writers etc. They keep open an IRC — so when a story breaks it’s their virtual newsroom. When a breaking-news story happens, the chatroom is almost like a newsroom. We’ve asked readers to trust us,
now they are asking us to trust them.

Tag: wemedia

Vince — friends call him Vito — picks me up from the hotel I’m staying at in Myrtle Beach, SC. He has a plaid short sleeve shirt held together by the only buttons he crossed successfully over his belly. He looks like a cross between a skinnier Don Vito (of “Viva la Bam” fame) and a man that was hanging way too often around my mother when I was 15.

At the left corner of his mouth he has a yellow stain, as if he just ate his way through a plate of pollen and forgot to rinse. His gray hair is messed every which way. He came to Myrtle Beach from North Carolina and is not about to go back any time soon.

He says he worked in Washington, D.C. about 25 years ago — he was a cab driver there as well. And also sold insurance. And was also a lobbyist. He gambled on the stock market and made lots of money. But then lost it all and had to move. He ran a two-cab company in Chapel Hill. He charged more than other companies, but he says he delivered people on time and was reliable. He charged $60 to get people from Chapel Hill to Durham (a little over 11 miles) and $45 for an airport ride.

In Myrtle Beach he works for the $1.8 per mile that most cabs use. This time of year is shitty for cabbies in Myrtle Beach. Most of the tourists are gone and the golfers are just starting to trickle in. He likes it when he makes $150 a day. Last week was crap. He made $50 Tuesday, $35 Wednesday and $4 Thursday (this is profit after all expenses are deducted).

What helps business is taking guys to the strip club — he gets about $5 a head for every guy he delivers to a strip joint. Strip clubs here are packed at 10 in the morning; mostly golfers trying to get their groove on before they hit the course. Whore houses though are even more profitable. Deliver one guy to the whore house — conveniently disguised as a massage parlor — and you get half of the fee they are charged. That means $40 a pop. Literally a pop if you think about it.

Myrtle Beach is a whore house — that’s why people come here, Vito says. He’s writing a book about it. He says he wrote one about Chapel Hill, but it was a political book. He also just recently got his South Carolina insurance salesman license. Next on his list is a lobbyist license. He’s going to lobby to bring poker machines to Myrtle Beach — he knows some people who make ATMs who also make poker machines.

With New Orleans off the gambling circuit for a while, Myrtle Beach can get in the game and make some money. And video poker could certainly do the trick. And if that doesn’t work, Vito still hopes the Washington Times, his favorite newspaper, will pay him some royalties for an idea he passed on to the editor more than 20 years ago during a cab ride.

Good luck Vito!

Am scris pentru “Dilema Veche” un articol despre uraganul Katrina si efectul pe care l-a avut asupra solidaritatii (sau lipsei de) americanilor:

Puteti sa-l cititi aici.

Saturday afternoon I was walking into the NYC subway several yards behind this girl with a backpack. She was flip-flopping down the three flights of stairs ahead of me when she suddenly stopped, turned around and ran back.

I watched her and assumed she was a stupid Japanese tourist. However, as I went further I saw a homeless guy lying on his back, head propped slightly against the wall with one knee up and a nylon jacket draped over it.

Only when I was about five steps above him did I see that he was masturbating. Fearing a ‘Silence of the Lambs’-type moment, I stopped and briefly considered turning like the backpack girl. But then I remembered how f’n long it takes to get to Greenpoint.

I looked the guy in the eyes, not in a threatening way, just with my head cocked slightly to the side as if to say, “We’re both reasonable people…” He stared back, his four yellow teeth sticking out over his bottom lip. Then his nylon jacket stopped bouncing. He took out his hand and rested it on his stomach, as if to say, “I respect you, you respect me; please pass on by and have a nice day.”

I nodded my head “Thank you” and walked past him and around the corner. It was only when I got on the E that I started feeling so good about myself. Yeah for my ovaries and their steel composition! I used the steel ovaries on instinct — it didn’t require second thought. Evaluate options, use ovaries. It was better for my self-esteem than any nice boss comment. I feel like I can take the world now. Not even a masturbator can hold me back! Whoo hooo!

Today is one of those days when The New York Times turns its mighty eye to my home country of Romania. The topic is — and it comes as no surprise — orphans. Nicholas Wood has been covering Central and Eastern Europe for a while and his stories appear both in the International Herald Tribune and the Times.

Enough with introductions, just read the story.