From CAFE, and the Vocs media pack has network welcome to stay tuned. I'm prepared, I think reducing misery is far better go for society than promoting happiness. Promoting happiness is good. Reducing misery is more urgent and also likely to mobilise people to action. That's Daniel condiment he's one of the most, if not the most influential cycle, the gist of our time in two thousand, to hear the Nobel Prize in Economics for quote, having integrated in sites from psychological research into Exe science especially cons an inhuman judgment and decision king under uncertainty. End quote: a decade later his groundbreaking book, thinking fast and slow market. The nation of his life's work study. bias in decision making in recent years,

parliament has turned his focus to what he refers to as noise or wanted very ability and judgments in everything from the practice of medicine to the sentencing of criminal defendants to pop culture and what makes some songs hits but others who joins me to discuss all of this and his remarkable career. That's coming up stay tuned support for as ever. So it comes from the costs of the modern way to buy own and enjoy a second home across it isn't a resort timeshare. It's real estate, co ownership still help you find the second home of your dreams and then bring together other people to Cologne with you and with their full service management and easy scheduling, there's less hassle and expects learn more about Colonna ship and secret listings, pepper, caso, dot, com, that's p, a c s, o dotcom support

Today's episode comes from future hindsight. The award winning podcast from meal utmost join me. Let every day for deep dies into some of the most pressing issues facing our societies and discover how you can reinvigorate our social contract. You'll always come away with something helpful future hindsight currencies and focuses on efforts to promote diverse political candidates and young voter engagement and features the women working to make our democracy more representative and inclusive for all. Follow future hindsight wherever you listen to pack or tune in on future hindsight dotcom. Now, let's get to your questions. So there are a lot of questions this week about the New York State agencies report long awaited that finally dropped this week. That look

Sexual harassment allegations against the governor of New York Andrew Cuomo. Here's one question from Sarah who asks as a former prosecutor: what's it out to you about the Cuomo report? Did anything surprise you either in terms of its conclusions or the way that the investigation was conducted so loud things stood out to me I will say it was not particularly surprised at the nature of quality and tone of the report. Nor of the tone and temperament of both June came in and Clark and Tis James than your secretary general, who over saw it I think they are extremely professional. I think the report itself is extremely professional. It's a hundred sixty five pages long. It details, among other things, the process investigation, they spoke to a hundred and seventy nine witnesses from reporting. We know they spend hours and hours with each witness there. they spent eleven hours alone with the governor, self and they re literally thousands of pages of documents. They looked at emails, they looked blackberry messages

so they had a lot of information, so not surprised by the meticulous of the investigation and the report. I am not surprised by the thoroughness of it goes back to the tone I predicted all along given the professionalism of June came has been my friend for a long time and my work colleagues. For a long time, there would be very fact, based that there would be allegation after allegation were cited in the report only if it had corroboration and they'll be balanced in their approach. Looking at the testimony they got and the initiative credibility at many junctures in the report, they talked about an allegation, for example with respect to executive assistant, one that she's referred to in the report, who made a particular allegation about being physically groped by the governor in his office, and they make an assessment. Credibility of those allegations were not. There were contemporaneous emails or contemporaneous statements to other folks, they also in Korea. And the denials, whether their credible or not, by the governor himself

press conference. It announced the release of the report. I was struck by something that June said would basically framed. I think, a lot of this. He talked about how multiple things coexisted. At the same time, in the governors mansion during the period that they investigated executive chambers culture fear and flirtation intimidation and intimacy abuse and affection, created a work environment ripe for harassment, which I think sums up a lot of. the report found, they make a very clear statement. It's not mealy mouthed there, say. Their ultimate conclusion is that the governor of the state of New York engaged and unlawful sexual harassment that there were eleven credible victims, So overall, that's how I felt about the report to the extent I was struck by particular allegations are a new set of allegations involving something that we did not know about. Four from press reports

those allegations of sexual harassment against state trooper. Somebody who, according to the report Andrew Cuomo, ran into at the r K bridge at some public event looks He picked her out and then had a direct and personal hand in getting her promoted to his security, till now. It's interesting about that before we get to the allegations turns out, she only her two years on the job in regulation. Special The two years is not enough to be promoted and other unit, but they did want. They made a special exception for this state trooper, after which, according to the report and according to her very credible testimony under oath HU, the investigators he made sexual events of comments and engage in on one touching of her body on more than one occasion now, there's Apart from the governors office resource locally produced video, there must have been in advance that doesn't it

Many of the things that are resides in the report, including the allegations of the state trooper, including the allegations of retaliation. There is a document that his lawyer reading Levin posted on the governors website. Which at first I thought must be very substantial cause. It runs to eighty five pages and had a closer look. You realise that its many something pages of text, which again is right? collective in what they address and what they don't address, perhaps in part because he wrote it before so it was in the report, but then there's fifty pages of photographs of Andrew Cuomo and not just happened their people engaging in hugs and cheek hissing include, Obama, hugging hurricane victims, Andrew call of kissing his mother on the cheek, look

affectionate with his father, I dont know who advise that that was a defence or the tat was he plausible way to attack and robust this very specific allegations of unwanted touching and groping and sex based harassment in terms of language and statements and propositions? But if you want to know what struck me, it was the lateness of the response, as much as the power of the report now, as you ve heard before, if you listen to the show, there is foundation laid for attacking the credibility and the honesty and motivations of investigators, both Latisha James in June came I recited to all of you the craziness of Andrew Cuomo and his people in trying to make the argument to page six of the new post. Just a few. Go then one the motivations virgin Kim was to undermine the political stance Andrew Cuomo show that who I prepare our could run for governor against the damage office holder, which, as I said before, is a lie and is stupid, and I have no doubt ridge

did with and was done with. The approval of Andrew Cuomo there'll. Be some more of that. I imagine his prey defiant for those who want to know what's happening next, as I think many people who have seen Andrew Cuomo for a period of time predicted he will not resign. Even the present himself. The head of the Democratic Party and a friend of Andrew Cuomo, has called for his residence in every single member of the democratic congressional delegation, has called for the resignation of Andrew Cuomo, but he won't do it. So what are the options? What happens next? I guess you can either in office defiantly, but there is an ongoing impeachment investigation taking place in the Europe Save State Assembly who speakers Carl Hasty, who made some pretty hard comments about his reaction to the report this week, whether he will launch full force impeachment proceedings against Andrew Cuomo remains to be seen, but I think that full, the people have been calling for, including by the way the new democratic nominee for mayor of the city of New York, Eric atoms and there's. Another

So that's come up a lot as well, for example in this from Bailey who asks couldn't Europe attorney General's report on Andrew Cuomo, sexual harassment leading little charges and the answer that we respect of each region office is no. I believe she has the authority to bring those kinds of charges. Yet, if they all say before I get to the possibility of criminal charges is a number of these women. I think now have greater ending in a roadmap by which they can bring their own civil suits against and require which would lead to discovering. Perhaps potential judgments against him in a civil court of law that was to criminal charges, as I'm recording this on Wednesday morning. There is news of at least three district attorney's office in New York, who have formally asked for information from the attorney general's office So they can make their own independent assessment about what a criminal charges are warranted with respect to some, so of these allegations. Those years offices include the County of Albany David source, Westchester County. many Roma and the Manhattan DA's office run by still save ants.

You have to remember that allow the allegations in the hundred sixty five page report while they may qualify as violations of title seven civil rights law. They are not crimes proposition in making unwanted comments, creating an in approach and hustle work environment is not a violation of any criminal statute, but some of the things that are alleged could amount to sexual assault. Like some of the allegations made by executive system, one and by the state trooper and those are the kinds of things at the various dossiers will be looking at making an assessment of, depending also on the cooperation of the alleged victims, and it is possible that there will be a criminal charges. Andrew Como as well, but that remains to be seen and if you're watching the story critically, live in New York and you care about who the leader of the state of the state government is bear in mind. One thing this investigation began when people came forward bravely- and I I had myself to the course of voices who commands of bravery. These women who came forward is not an easy thing to do anything

by the way, the report detailing how much retaliation went on another point: that's gone largely unregarded by the Cuomo Camp and by the Cuomo camps, lawyers that he called for the investigation to be done by the J because he was under political pressure to do so. So having done that every time he's x out and says its biased towards politically motivated, or was the wrong person to have done it. Remember, he's, the one who said that's where it should occur, because at that moment, he's. The kind of person who in the moment tries to do the most expedient thing, that's my experience with him and that's what he does that's reminiscence thing that, if your New York he remember from a few years ago, with great fanfare, he decides to set up the Warren Commission, which is to examine corruption, widespread corruption in the state legislature, in other places in New York, state and suddenly, nine months later be long before did finished its work shut it down. I will also say on the question of whether or not you believe these victims for making allegations who have no reason to make them.

there's, no bad motivations that are credible, that you can lodge against them when you try you're with another credible, I think, investigators and potentially future judges in court cases we'll have to weigh their credibility against a governor who I own experience, does not have a reputation for straightforward honesty and truthfulness. People lied about me what also the capable of lying. Stay tuned, there's more coming up after this, if you want an e commerce business. This add my change, everything for you and that's not something I say all the time. Ok, but if you ve ever scrolled wistful through incredible marketing emails and texts from major brands and wondered quietly allowed what sort of magic duster these guys sprinkling over there

occasions. I'm gonna, let you in on a major secret. They probably use clavijo Clavijo takes the mystery out of email and sms marketing, offering all you marketers entrepreneurs and creators out there. The data driven automated platform. You need to create authentic relationships with your customers, like a top tier brand, say goodbye to blasting vague newsletters to an entire mass of faceless people, Combine your customer data with a smart marketing platform like Klaviyo and you'll, engage every customer one on one like there you're. Only customer engagement like this builds valuable relationships that make you money. If you're the creator of an e commerce brand, you need a platform that hustles as hard as you do. Playbill unlocks the power of your E commerce data. So you can personalize and automate messages that keep customers coming back to get started. With a free trial of Clavijo visit, clavijo dot com, slash box.

that's k, L av! I why dot com slash box if you work from home like I do, the days can start to blend together, Finally, if you sit at one end of a webcam and your colleagues are far far away, if you're itching for those team meetings with lunch provided to add little variety to your day, your employees might be feeling the same monotony door dash. the company you know for food delivery now has a way to help your team stay connected. Nor dash for work makes complex orders simple. You can offer food benefits as an employee perk. It's called dash pass for work. There are no delivery fees and there'll be reduced service fees on eligible orders. Plus you create a more competitive benefits package that will help attract and retain top talent can't lose their it's an incredible remote, friendly work perk that people will appreciate. Take a closer look

learn more by visiting worked out door dash, dot com, slash preach, that's work that door dash dot com, slash preach, make work delicious, My guess this week is Nobel Prize Winning psychologist Daniel Economists. he's been thinking about why we make the decisions we do for practically his entire life, a life that was recognised, with the presidential metal of freedom presented to him. President Obama in twenty thirteen, basically invented the study of human decision making, but what We said Daniel part is his curiosity, guided by his belief that people are endlessly complicated and interesting condiments new book noise, call written with, casts Einstein and alleviate the bony pulls back there and on a new area of study, helping us under

and unwanted variability in judgment across organizations, institutions and governments. Professor Daniel condiment, thanks for being on the show, my pleasure We're gonna talk about your book noise, a flaw in human judgment, for what you have a couple of co authors before we get to that. As I was telling you before, we started. Recording I've been a fan of your work for a long time ago, when there are so many of us, and I had an initial worry the thing about this interview and an I consulted with our mutual friend Adam Grant, whose Wharton and I asked him what a why call Daniel economy had a wide address you he said column Danny. I said I can call him Danny. Oh, you must I said I to me see seeing your full name on on but covers is Daniel economy and given all the work that you have done and then

prize that you have won. I said I I can't column Danny. Maybe I can call him, Sir Danny that's the only name or respond to sell dancing. So I guess I don't call you that it will be very short interview. Ok, I will Danny, although it seems odd still out of my mouth. Thank you for doing this. Thank you for all the work. That you have done explaining, among other things, to the world that the people are not necessarily rational and, as I mentioned a moment ago, the subtitle of your book noise is a flaw in human judgment. and this has implications for lots and lots of things. One flaw human judgment. The people are more familiar with and you take pains to distinguish this book from his bias. We hear about bias, we learn about bias. We talk about buys. We try to train to overcome bias that something that everyone is familiar with to some degree,

fully. You distinguishes other flaw in human judgment, namely noise, which you define you in your co authors define as undesirable variability in judgments of the same problem. So a couple of examples: when similarly situated defendants- and this is an issue nearing dear to my heart when, similarly situated defendants are convicted of a crime and appear before one judge to be sentenced, they make it one sentence before different judge a different sense before a judge and other sends you get these great, substantial, very abilities. You give the eggs ample at great length in the book of insurance underwriters and how these premiums and you can take the same person who needs a premium set and depending on the nature of the or the identity of or the mood of even the insurance under writer.

Aims can be all over the map and that's the kind of noise and flying human judgment that you're getting out in the book to have that basically right absolutely, and why is it that you focus on noise and not buys? well, the two concepts of buyers and noise are most easily understood by thinking about measurement, because actually we think of judgment my co authors, and I will give you a simple. in case some steam, and I we think of Does a measurement with instrument is the human mind and the theory of measurement than the theory of errors and measurement is pertinent to the discussion of judgment. Now, if you're measuring align with a very fine rule,

and when you repeat the measurement of the same line with the same rule, you're not going to get the same numbers, it's going to vary from time to time this variables, IE is noise. The average error systematic, breast, the metal underestimated differences, the area from zero, that's bias, Now you can see that even in the complete absence of biased Suppose that you have your room. Your measuring instruments. by said also that its average error is zero, it can be all over the place. That is the answer. These values are the areas can be quite large, positive or negative, except the about the same Now the positive and negative areas we have no buys, but you have noise and clearly those errors. So, These are two ways of Aragon: come about the one way systematic variable with a different

The systematic variation from the true some systematic departure from the truth well you and the other is noise, which is simply variability from trial to trial when you're measuring the same life or judging the same case or assigning the premium to the same risks

or the example to finally made it more understandable to me when I got to in the book or shooting a free, throw in a basketball game. You in your co authors right in the book for judgment, is like a free throw in basketball. End quote, and that seems odd when you think about it. But then, as you explain, nobody can perfect the exact same motion, even them even the greatest professionals who might have a free throw rate of ninety percent. No one can recreate the exact same motion of the hands and arms and rest and everything else twice in a row. How is it helpful to think about judgment as a free through? Well? There is inherent variability that Jim aware

two in every domain. So we expect a mood to bury the expects. Naturally, your appetite to vary from out. Well, we expect a lotta variability. We expect. If you look very closely when you sign, two signatures in a row: they're not identical, so very abilities, basic biological phenomenon- and you see it absolutely everywhere, but this is one type of noise. It's what we call within personally the between personalized, is that one judge is going to be systematically different from another and in general, the differences between people are larger than the very ability within person. That is an but their equally mysterious. But why? Why explain a folks who, having read the book here,

why very ability is necessarily bad and you distinguish a couple of things so when we're talking about the judgments that a group might make or individuals with a group might make about a movie or a piece of art or another, That very ability is not only obviously expected, but either be valued, he don't want a society in which, as you say in the book we want to feel the same about a movie they ve seen you want that differentiate, and variability in people's critical reaction to something three different other in other areas, including how judges decide what the appropriate and fair sentences defended. So how do you determine in which rose in circumstances. Variability is ok and were mobility is bad and either has a great cost or does damage to fairness and justice, well, the main topic of all

ok, boys in professional judgment, so we think about professionals, making judgments quickly on behalf of them organisation. So when Judge sets a sentence to defend them in principle, at least the judges, not speaking for herself ass. She speaking for them. Justice system when an underwriters sets a premium for risk, The under writer is speaking on behalf of the organization. Now it seems to be pretty clear that the organization should have one voice that, as you would expect, you would want the recent judgments of the same object made on behalf of the organization to be the same. That is one obvious way in which noise is

clearly undesirable, so the most interesting kind of noise you ve already referred to it within a person is, is jarring. When I read about it, I think most people. Of reasonably open. Mindedness would understand that you have for judges. More certainly understand this and you point out the defence lawyers know this and prosecutors. No, it a lot of happens in a particular case will depend on the lottery of the judge and what that judges both by these are general noise across judges and that makes sense right people are different. Humans are different in different people, have different approaches to life and decision, making everything else that the degree of that we can about which is surprising. What I think is even more surprising to the to the point of being very jarring is that people are that, within themselves, their fairly consistent in our day to day

They have a particular view in whatever biases they have you, you would presume at those vices and be consistent, and yet you point out again and again and again something called occasion, noise and, depending on the time of day the judge or an insurance under writer or someone else, depending on mood, depending on their level of fatigue,. Make decidedly different judgments, Their own selves might have a different, our or a different day, and you point further and stop the the summary That that wasn't shocking to you as a scientist shocking to was how, shocking that result was to the people being studied. People have no sense of how variable their own judgments, or can you elaborate on it well people have no sense of how do you know how much they vary from one occasion to the other. They have little sense of that. Other people You know that, depending on their mood, they will

the same thing more or less people do know that the same food, his taste on some occasions than others. So we we have experience. of internal noise? I think that what surprises People more is how different they are from other people, and the reason for that is that when I look at the world I have the sense that I see the world as it is, as I do, because that's the way it is, each of us feels that our perception of the world of judgments about the will of the radical, they are true, and if they are very nickel in true, then we expect any other reasonable person. Looking at the same thing to see approximately the same thing and the amount of very ability in judgments are the same object. Some of the same crime by the same,

The Senate that variable be both within and between judges is much much much larger than people expect. The existence of this agreement to the existence of very bullets. He is not a surprise. within surprising the amount of the extent of it, and there is just shockingly more noise than people expect, both in the judicial system the insurance system and in his censure the medical in medical judgments in legal judgments. In effect, in any professional judgment that we ve looked at their is we're judgment is involved. There is noise more of it than you think, but are we hard wired? Are human beings brains hardwired to have this problem? In other words, do we come into the world and

grow up in a world, believing necessarily that other people think like we do or are there folks who is who escape that hand covering a little bit such that they appreciate noise, more children use would part of our our psyche to think that everyone sees the world the way we see the world. Well, I think you know what is really bill, in the sense that your perception of the world is, is essentially periodical but you see the world as it is and as you do, because that's the way it is that that is really part of the human condition. I think somebody who didn't feel that their perception of veridical would be in a terrible state of now. That's not how we live our lives. We live our lives with the sense that we understand the worldly we live in and that our perceptions are roughly correct

the idea that two of us can look at exactly the same thing and see that situation very differently, so that one judge can sign the defendant. Fears in prison were another one would sign fifteen that is surprising to people, because, kids, much more disagreement than we would expect, and even going back to the within person as apply to judges. You point out in several spots that there are particular times a day when judges when the same judges more likely be lenient, then harsh, typically after they ve had a break like lunch, what what's the reason for leanings after a meal? well, I mean in general, when you are when you are in a good mood, you're going to be generally more lenient when you're in a bad mood, you are going to be more severe in many cases the pending, unhelpful

TED. You are, if you're tired, you are going to take the default option. You are much more likely to do the defaulting without thinking so, for example, physicians prescribing antibiotics more in the afternoon when their tire than in the morning they prescribe opiates morning afternoon than in the morning, and that's because it's the easy way out of the situation it it's. What the patient expects that pressure is more effective and physicians when they are tired them when they are not tired. So that's the within person, noise, judges, it turns the rights of the big effect village, fairly consistent. They think they deem to be more lenient in the football team that they favour one. Yesterday they tend to be more lenient than otherwise. There is a big effect on pet of temperature on many judgments that be

make. Does the outdoor temperature, even even though it is presumably in the courtroom, it's a regulated room temperature level? Your studies have pointed out that the outside temperature Jeff Temperature, or even how a sports team did. The local sports team did can affect the rate of of harshness release. Yes, and you know, those are completely irrelevant features of the situation, they should not have any effect than they have something. There are many circumstances like that. Clearly mood has anything. So what happened to the judge on the way home and the way to the courts or what Happened at home is going to have an effect on the way the judge performs, or they insurance analysed all the physician right. This may be a dumb question, but does it necessarily follow that the better judgments by individual and by groups are made when the mood is good and when people are

fatigued not not necessarily right. I feel it. People think that I can assume, because when people fatigue and if they know their tell me, this is right. There. People are fatigued another fatigued, maybe they try a little harder and they engage in what, as you in another book call, the second kind of thinking at the first kind of thinking is that true or not? I would think that with respect to fatigue, that is not true that when you are fatigued, you are more likely to take the default option. and this likely due to think things through. So you may know you're fatigue, but it still with well mainly attempting to take the easy way when you are tired. With respect to move, the situation is quite different, that is being in a good mood.

or in a bad mood changes the way you think, but it doesn't it snuck that you simply think better. When you are in a good mood, you tend to be more creative when you are in a good mood, but you also tend to be more superficial when you're, a good and more gullible when you're, in a good mood than when you're in about so that, with respect to move the picture is ambiguous. With respect to fatigue is clear. That being fatigue is not for judgment. So here's my tried another dumb question in the case of a judge when it judges in a good mood, either because it's your birthday and you can actually talk about statistics willing to defendants getting lower sentences on their birthdays? No study that that you are aware of, and the book examining whether not judges on their own birthdays or more lenient or not. But let's say a judge knows on particular occasions that he or she is going to be in a good mood.

and their more lenient on those occasions, is at bias or that noise, well, noise, Is it variability in bias? Is biased, systematic here? So you can be its clear, your bike, to be more lenient on days when you're in a good mood, but whether you're in a good mood or in a bad mood. That's accidental, so your biased, both Is it the variability of your biases that creates more jobs Fatigued it as well- and maybe we should have opened- is closer to the guests. Quite tired, the small California less well at midnight. night? I would ask you to make any important professional judgment leaves on the one example of within person noise, that I thought was more than jarring actually shocking was. I think you refer to a study of twenty two physician who examined the same thirteen Andrew grams several months,

part, so they did not know where they were re examining an angiogram and they looked at before it made a certain judgment and that those physicians disagreed with themselves between sixty three and ninety. Two percent of the time is an extraordinary discrepancy, You know I'm going to make a very embarrassing confession. I think this number is a mistake and it's a mistake. I think we had it backward So there is inconsistency, but has not quite a ninety percent. Now it's between ten forty percent of the time they dont have read with themselves and that's about it now, and olive tries to everybody for that mistake, it hit me, so I felt I had to ask about it. That's why I apologize so. Let's watch pause for second for people who have jobs where they make professional judgments, which is a lot of,

perhaps most people once you are armed and we'll get to the judges in a moment, because that's a subject as important to me, given my former line of work. But so if you know that group, variable, and you know that you yourself are not yourself at all times. And you have an important job near to make important decisions about things, whether to set a price or whether the new devalues stock in a particular way. What's the lesson for you about how you should think about make decisions, and should you always get nine hours of sleep well certainly should get enough sleep. You certainly should not make judgements when you're in extreme mood. Those are obvious and in addition, there Really steps that you can take to reduce air and to improve the quality of when I say you that's not quite accurate. I think organizations can impose procedures and can impose ways of thinking on people make judgements on their behalf.

I think that organizations can improve the judgment, the people who are the people who work for them. We call that those steps that improve judgments. We call them decision hygiene and it's a somewhat of putting term that, like washing your hands, The suit of hygiene have the character that you don't know when you wash your hands what germs you're killing you don't know what disease you're preventing. So there are just steps that you'd better take because they make you generally safer and there are steps that, when their ways of organizing when stretching and process for the judgment, processing, an organization that are less error prone than that

Let's, let's talk about the judgment of the crowd for a moment, there is a saying that you recite the others wisdom in the crowd, so, for example- and this I found surprising also, if you have one person to guess the weight of a large farm animal, are you ask one person to guess the number of Jelly beans in a big jar they'll be off by often a lot? If, yes to people you take the average you'll do better. If you have hundreds of people each making their making the the likelihood of accuracy is increased dramatically So does that mean that, in all cases the crowd is wise? Well, here is where the different such as noise and buys is really important. So I suppose you have people, judging the that's the classic story, dragging the weight of an ox affair

if there is to be biased and they all by so that the average of the air is say, plus two hundred pounds that is not fixed by think. Many people, on the other hand, when you take many judgments, guaranteed to reduce noise, and if you take a lot of judgment, The average of the judgment is essentially noise free, so This is one way of getting rid of noise, and this is averaging multiple judgment. It would be obvious. case of measuring the length of the line. That you're better off measuring the nineteen times and taking the average of the tent measurements, then counting

one measurement and believing that accepting that judgment as valid payment as valid right. But what it seems important to this conclusion and observation is that the individual judgments that later get aggregated an average that each of those judgments has to be independent and is not influenced in advance by the predictions judgments of other people, so that, for example, there is. There is a great study that you and your call Others refer to a number of studies about the popularity of certain songs and people judgments about what songs were were good or not. Good enough came out sort of predictably when they were indeed delete saying whether we like the sun or not, but once you introduce the concept of popularity songs. Another would people could see how many other people had already downloaded or like the song that had a very dramatic effect on whether or not the particular individual, like the song, because your being influenced socially

how big problem is that, in terms of this is what fashion and fast looked like with respect to sell It was really dramatic. There was a study, as I believe they had fifty songs that they studied the popularity of the iraqi people to download them and for different groups. They allow people to know about each how many times it had been, what with the frequency, had been downloaded pipe prior p, pull in the same group and that had the cultures that they set up very dramatically. That is the route, a separate, very dramatically, and it turned out that which some was a hit was anything barely predicted. That is there very little difference between average song and very good. Some offers

were much more predictable. That is that there was more agreement between people and what is a really bad song, but is relatively little agreement on what is a hit on what is a good, sound, good song? That seems to be largely accidental, but there is one exception. I felt my favorite. the description. That study was it even when you at some point. Somebody in the study inverted the original judgments, so school in a false scores, were given the songs were deemed by the control group to be not good and were given metrics. It suggests that they were good, but that over time the truly excellent song was still rise, and I think you saying the book the lesson of that is there's no, even a good song, a great song down, I think too, that offers some hope. Well, it takes a lot of judgments in order to turn to flip back this attractive conformity ultimately, but that takes a very long time,

you know, quality will rise to some extent been united. Taken definite numbered just put it this way. which some gives a hip. Today is largely accident, that is the difference between the top song in the tents most popular song. That is largely an accident in how many times they were played earlier, when many this jockeys adopt the same song can be by accident. That's that tend to snowball that has an effect that is self reinforcing and that's how fashion it happens. So I guess my question is in an area does not maybe are as high stakes as criminal prosecution and sentencing, but if you're a year, if you're in the recording industry I mean it is it is there a vast amount of science, but they rely upon to try to figure out how to get their songs to be hits or

are they is lacking in this understanding about noise as all these other professions? Well, I think it's generally accepted that The success of films and of songs is largely unpredictable. You can, you can recognize very bad books, recognise very bad songs and on that they tend to be agreement, What will be a hit? What will be a best seller is really not predictable. Unless you haven't author or songwriter, with a record and everybody's cured. What did the last thing that they did, and that is likely to be at least temporarily success a hit, but I am large. I think there is agreement that there is very little agreement

My conversation with Daniel economy continues. After this well, it's finally happening the world is opening up again and were hearing there were normal being tossed around a lot more, but after the year we ve had truly feeling normal is going to take some time and a little bit of work

if you're one of the many people who might be feeling overwhelmed and anxious or if you find yourself having more bad days and you care to talk, space might be for you now more than ever. It is important for us to be patient with ourselves and seek out the support we might need. After all, half of american struggle with mental health tax base is here to help talks base is secure, affordable and easy to use your mental health matters and whether you are apparent student or even part of a couple, that's looking for more support talks base has the right sort of professionals to meet your needs. Why wait leaks for unemployment when you can match with a licensed therapist today for the talks base app set goals with your therapist on your schedule? Chat any time and conduct live video sessions from anywhere

All part of my talk space is the number one online therapy platform to help you sort through any issue match with a licence therapists when you gonna talk, spaced out, come and get one hundred dollars off your first month with a promo code preach. That's why dollars off when you use code preach a talk, space, dotcom, your budgets in place and the numbers check out you ve carefully crafted the job descriptions for your ideal team, And you ve dreamed up all the projects and exciting things you can do with these new additions to your team. Now it's finally the time to kick off the search and make this dream a reality best way to do that with help from Cyprus. The zipper couldn't you don't have to wait around for great candidates to find you they'll do that, for you ship recruited, credible matching technology, finds the candidates with the right experience and actively invites them to apply. So you get qualified candidates fast with just one

you can post a job on zip recruiter that get sent out to over one hundred top job sites. It's no surprise, then, that four out of five employers who use it. Recruiter, quality care, its within the first day Will set you off right to assemble that dream team. You ve been looking for start finding great candidates today when you try, zip recruiter for free, go to zip recruiter. Dotcom slash proves once again that Zebra Godaddy COM, slash preach, there's something interesting that you refer to that just popped into my head, based on the songs, and I wonder if there is a difference in these two areas and one is dead, the bias or the noise. It occurs when professors, great exams, and

it tends to be true. I think you conclude that a professor who knows the identity of a student, if you like the first, the answer, the first question or if you like the first paper, your favourable impression of that answer, that substantive response, the color of your view of the second response or the second paper and you'll, tend to feel that it was better perhaps than it actually is because of the no the halo effect of the first so far. So good right is that correct. Absolutely may that's described that. I think, because that was a personal experience. I used to read Vienna multiple essays booklets when I was a professor Reagan rating essays.

I would write down the sore the grateful, and I said that I would be the next day by the same food, and then I decided on one occasion just to try to read all the assets from all the students and red each other and bright red at the back of the books of the buckets. I would not see it when I read the next the next question and the results were really shocking. It very disappointing to me and the shook him the disappointment with that. I found that he was that students and student seem to differ from one side to the next much much more than they had in mind in the previous normal way that I have been doing it and the mechanism is really straightforward. When you have given a very good great weakness,

when you read the next essay and it says something stupid, you say: well, you know they didn't mean it. You give them the benefit of the doubt and giving the benefit of the doubt is a failure that this independence principle, which are the main noise reduction principle that we focus on so that a matter for reducing noise there. But the reason I asked the question is: we were talking about music, ago in dismay, some anecdotal experience without having dealt into this, does that same dynamic, occur with songs. If you like the first song by a particular artist and then they release a second song are more likely to like the second son, because you like the first or might you be disappointed if the second song is not as good as the first well, I think that

the facts are there is likely to be a subway contrast, the faint, but by and large, the halo effect is going to be much stronger so that, if you loved the sun by the first author you'll be strongly inclined to like the second one, an end to give them and if it were the doubt so that, for example, if you don't feel thrilled with it, you might think will perhaps I'm not in the right mood. And if you have that kind of thought. This is a sign that your judgments are not independently of each other, and tend to be internally more consistent with this case, but that will create differences between people, because it's an accident when different. People here a series of songs, whether they like the first one, more or less, determines how much like the second one and that snowballs again those differences than to smoke. I would like to Danny respectfully suggest

a further study in your next book on a particular phenomenon in music, known as the one hit wonder there are bands and musical acts then have one outsize hit. This halo effect didn't seem to help them because he never produced another had again, even though, when my concluded, he loved ones wrong, you would at least like another song, so I'm curious to know how that works from onto more serious matters, judges who sentence people to prison and take away their liberty, which is part of their job and in part, the job that most others find

the most difficult, your studying and conclusions make it even more imperative that we think about, and judges think about. Society thinks about the ways in which you get fairness and sentencing in one feature of fairness, not the only future, but one feature of fairness is consistency so that if I happenstance you committed in particular fraud in New Jersey and someone else commits the exact same fraud in Oregon or in California or in Texas, that its reasonably foreseeable that you will get the same sentence from different folks and lots and lots of studies have shown. That's not true. In fact, there was a big movement as you recite in your book back in the early eighties pioneered by federal district court judge to try get rid of these discrepancies in what emerged from that was what, at one time was mandatory sentencing guidelines. Were you take all these facts? there's a new would eliminate some of the discretion, the judges

have and by limiting some of the discretion. This is not the language that court used before or Congress used before, but to use your parlance that eliminated some noise, but that didn't work out, as you also describe how come well, it turns out that judges hated, they hated the guidelines and they resisted them, and indeed the guidelines did reduce noise quite significantly. There is evidence to that and then the guidelines, because I've been issue the Supreme Port. Well, I wouldn't call it a technical matter, because it was an important matter, but the supreme poured turn the guidelines from compulsory to advisory and since then there is much more noise.

And an there is evidence that the judge, like it much better this way that its judges feel that the way they feel about the case, that is justice- and you know that's a very striking example in mind, of what I was saying earlier, that you feel the will. As you see, it must be the world as it is that the just this, the sentence that feels just were judge that is their since that it must be just and the fact that another judge would give a very different judgment. That is something that my since, in the judicial system doesn't want to think about. So are we? Are we doing this all wrong? One thought came to me as I was reading your book, and that is, there are circumstances in the law in which our system understands that the judgment of one actor, one judge alone, will not

I'd sufficient justice, so that, when you take a case up, an appeal is not one judge its three their opportunities, even in the federal court of appeals to raise the matter with the full court of appeal. Sometimes you can have no more than ten judges wing and on a matter, so you know the outliers cancel each other out in some measure and you get a little closer to the equivalent of what you're describing at the beginning of taking multiple measures. but out of line and then, of course, in the most important court in the land. You don't have one judge deciding that nine and then, let's go back to the moment of truth, for particular, individual has been convicted of a crime whose deciding that sentence, one judge and in a radical thought, occurred to me, which is not no practically implemented, but I dont think. But, but would we have a better system if, at a minimum we brought two or three other judges in at the moment of sentencing, and they had to agree

or you know, do an average against the thought. Experiment underwent letters from lawyers sunny whether such a term plaque dear, but would we have less noise and more fairness if we added humans that is guaranteed yeah that you would have less. Noise is a mathematically. That's mathematically guarantee it's like that, a more just and more fear also. Well, you know how going to define justice of fairness in general. I think you you would expect that the average judgment any judges is more reliable and an indication of what is just then, the judgment of the smaller number or the single individual differences because you're eliminating noise when you're taking many people. If there is biased by the way,

as I mentioned earlier, taking many judges. If all of them a biased, is not going to improve things, but noise you can improve by taking many measurements or by using a by having many judges, participate, provided their independence with each other, and one thing you talk, and that is a constant focus of study, particularly the law. But it, but everywhere is the difference between a standard and a rule in rule reduces discretion and so again to user parlance. It reduces noise. So we have less variability because you have less discretion, standards allow for discretion and also bring into play more noise and more bias. Didn't we need more rules and fewer standards. Generally speaking, all that's a deep philosophical

as far as I know, that's why I'm asking you well, you know one of the problems that rules- and this we know all too well in the justice system- is that when you have rules, peep can look for Lou those in the rules which is harder to do when there are standards. So there is found. The societal response, rules and standards tends to be quite different and in Many cases. I would think that standards are applied, trouble to rules that that can be gained rules that can be gained a possibly the worst stories, equitable that I can. Think of because getting a good lawyer turns out to be very important in a system that operates on rules. Some of what your research shows. His eye opening for people

understand the usefulness of entering first. What do you think hiring interviews are useful, were independent other conducted, and there is a very large deficits in the usefulness and useful us between what we call structured, announced, structured interviews at the end, wretched interview is when you dress, you have a person, try to get an impression of another person and just asking questions as they arise in the context. Compensation, it turns out that I'm structured into views are really quite weak in the information that they provide, structured interviews or better But it should also be pointed out that hiring is very difficult. Good hiring, difficult in fact, put timing is impossible because future performing should depend on chance to a large extent, and that's unpredictable I would say the general judgement is that

structured interviews, largely useless. They feel they don't feel useless. The people conductor, you had the sense that his hairy both for you to know that those, but in terms of their predicted the liberty, they really do very little part of what's going on there and it gets to another, maybe impossibly large psychological and philosophical topic that we can't get proper attention to. But the role of intuition, two very successful people, and even some not successful people have a lot of confidence in their ability to make decisions. They also have a lot of confidence in their ability to judge applicants to jobs, and you know they have a gut feeling about somebody,

I think. Maybe you know in sports recruiting, which is largely, I think, I'm an expert but largely focused on statistics and metrics and measurable things. There is still some element of got or intuition. Is it ok for that to enter into the calculus in hiring and in an enlarged question? When is it fair and safe to realign intuition? When is it not well, we know fear above you not people like making intuitive judgments. Intuitive judgments have their characteristics. They come with high confidence. You know you have an intuition that major pretty sure that you ve got it right. You may not know why you ve got it right than that that's how he jewishness advance the fine as people feeling that they know something without knowing why they know it. But intuition and the confidence that comes with it is not always justified, and actually we do know. We have

fairly simple rules about what, intuitions trustworthy and when they are not ended many domains. People have intuitions and they shouldn't trust them. If you do an unpredictable world. Essentially, then who may have a lot of intuitions, the true situations are likely to be completely worthless. I'll give you an example: the stock market, the stock market is lovely unpredictable if it were pretty its arms perfectly unpredictable. If it were predictable, people take advantage of it and then it would become a good the boy. So the stock market is unpredictable, Elliot People, a strong intuitions about particular stocks, and they trade on their intuition and those trades are typically not good for the trader noise trades for me so in sports scouts have intuition and those that famous book by Michael Louis many ball, showing

and though the lovely fill that they made of it with Brad Pitt, indicating that scouts out too confident that actually statistics were under used in baseball them much. I think them like a Louis, a performance They saw this and ever since many Bob statistics have become much more significant and I use but more frequently in sports, but though the judgment of scouting should have joint of scout. Of with a completely sure terms, not to be worth that much. I recommend the filled by the way I've seen it now. It's lovely an end, and we are all here offensive. Michael Louis, is welcome as all also written about you in your work and and people should check that book out also nothing about how to ask this question, which seems relevant in light of what you just said in that is

generally speaking, I might not have this completely right, so bear with me. Generally speaking, we took when you talk about noise. We view that is a bad thing, because you don't get accurate judgments in predictions, aren't in a well developed in many instances. But I wonder when you're talking about something normative, a decision about a sentence for somebody or a decision about with a proper value of a company is so you eat you, you'd meant, stock taking a moment ago- and I know the job of a stock picker- is not to us the value of a company but to predict what other people will think the value of the company is going to be such that you can make new good recommendations for your clients, and I know there been any studies about this, but it's something I'm curious about giving our conversation in your book. Is it sometimes the case that the time you outliers who'd, who were wrong about the value of accompanying the bend, the price of a stock. Can they, the influencers to bring the value that

Benny down because it should come down base on a slew of other economic indicators and financial indicators about the camp. In other words, is it still important? Have noise. So that think things that are overvalue become less valued or in the case of criminal justice and sentencing the outliers Hussein case after case. That sense is meted out for small crimes or non violent crimes should be less but their sort of deviance, because I'm doesn't have the rest of the folks think an unknown on asking this in it an artful way, but is there some role and important role of that kind of noise so that over the long term, you get something better as a result. Well, in enormous problems such as the length of sentences, their philosophical differences

then it's not clear whether necessarily the trend is upward and the trend is what improvement, but certainly noise can create variability and can create changes. That can certainly happen. It's not bad way, it's not so much the sentences that cause the change. Some people think that the system is not right, that the sentencing system is not right and that debate certainly that Pleading justified the bait. The question is whether individual defendants should bear the burden of the variable t, that's a different question, and I am not sure that noise, MRS solely leads to him to improve. Is there anything from your work that

forms your view of how society should deal with governments and businesses should deal with covered vaccination hesitancy. The topic has been much discussed and I dont think I have much

water. There are so many reasons for the scene hesitancy them. There is no obvious q because they had been an obvious q. Pete would have used it, so I dont thinks, sadly, and that I have much to offer those lemme take another shot. Is it your view based on your work and all the studies you ve been involved in that not only to people not appreciate their own variability, but the people are not good at assessing probability, whether or not they took advance math class is right. That is certainly true people quite weak at assessing risks and other some people for whom this become a polarizing political issue. But do you have some sense just as an observer as to how much people's resistance to masks or vaccines or other kinds of things has to do with this issue? You know and an inability to properly gauge risk

probability that has certainly bought a bit others if people were able to get dressed so probability wooden see what we are seeing now, that's clear, but I would also add that this is so much an issue of people assessing the rest by themselves. None of us individuals have enough information to do that. So the issue is not so much whether weaken us the risk individually, its we trust when it comes to assessing risks and

looks set to rely on other people in assessing risks and who we choose. The trust that turns out to be the major difference in the major variable in whether people get vaccinated. Do you think that people should be taught principles of psychology at an early age and, if so, how early? I think it wouldn't hurt for people to be taught to be critical of thinking their own and that, above all, its actually easier to to be critical of other people thinking, and so that's what I would focus on teaching and presumably if people were critical of the quality of each other thinking, standards are thinking might rise, and that would be a very desirable thing.

Any more particular question that you may not have an opinion on, but also, as I was preparing for the interview, I got to go back to something that I mentioned in my own book, and I mentioned many many times. I was at a time when I was the United States attorney in York. I went to a a a compliance conference. You know enforcement conference in London And there was a woman who was the General Council, a very big company fortune, fifty company, and she said it. Gunnar undergraduate degree in psychology and then obviously got a law degree, and that is, as General Council the company were much of her job was focused on trying to get people to behave better and conduct themselves appropriately. The true live much Warner cycle. she degree than on her law degree. My questions are: aid is at resonate with you and be. Will you join me in advocating for mandatory psychology classes in law, schools. It certainly resonate with me. You know unbiased. That way. I think that I think the current

the errors should be mandatory, endless schools that you know it, because the judgments are these people make are too important to be left chance so that a yes, you already have dropped the petition What is more important. I know you have a view on this, but ask Alaska broadly what what's more important for an organisation or for a society to reduce misery or to promote happiness Oh I'd, I'd, think reducing misery is a far better go for society than promoting happiness. Promoting happiness is good by producing misery is more urgent and also likely to mobilise people to action and mobilise society. So I think sing, misery would be my first priority. That's that interesting. You say that, because I've had

discussions recently with guests on the show and we'd addressed a particular misery, causing phenomenon poverty, extreme poverty. in an I'm, I'm interested in what you said a moment ago about how you make it more people on board Joe by was quoted as saying not too long ago, and I want to get into politics, but for the purposes of this conversation, I think its relevant that there are politicians who believed Zobeide, maybe one of them- that for political success and for consensus building, we should spend more time talking about the middle class and improving their lot, which seems to me to be the analogue of promoting happiness rather than trying to bring people in extreme poverty up which would be the equivalent of reducing misery and that society as a whole care more about improving the lot of the middle in helping the lot of the poor. Dear me reaction to that. Well, though, the reaction is that this is a political system.

They're all move more voters in the middle there are among the very poor and that people to some extent, at least about their own interests. So when you know we're talking about society at large, political realities. That's just have to be accepted because they exist. When you talk about the balance in favour of reducing misery verses happiness is her, is only economic zone overall social wealth. Or economic argument that is part of that, or is it something else implanted? it's an observation that, with made women? a while ago, some very commonplace one, which is that people well that's bad, is more powerful than good pain, is more powerful than

Some losing a hundred dollars has a bigger impact and winning a hundred dollars. So there is a phenomenon that we ve called loss aversion and most the version means that losses Lou larger than gains, and it means that reducing losses has a bigger effect overall, psychologically then, improving gains by the same amount. So that's the underlying phenomena and giving their support for corporations as well to understand. Certainly- and many of them do right now withstanding. We think we can get into a discussion that occurs to me about the minimum wage and how that would have an impact on worker morale and on the institution and the mood of the institution itself. But that's what I think we have. We have time for that. You spend a lot of time, debunking long held articles of faith on the part of a lot of very smart people, namely, if I, if I can phrase it this way, showing people the folly of believing that opium,

rational destruct noise is a little bit about that and showing in fairly straightforward ways and experiments that our knowledge of ourselves and our knowledge of decision making is pretty poor, and this is decades after some of your most groundbreaking work in a long while after he won the Nobel Prize in Economics. If I might ask you to be immodest for a moment, what is the contribution you was made to people's knowledge and understanding that you were more? out of, or you think that it was the most important. I would think I'll early work on buys a judgment turned out to be quite important. More importantly, expected at the time because In fact there is within the Social Sciences and in philosophy, a very strong argument that people are rational and we showed that people are not rational by the technical Phoenician that their error free? We show that people make systematic errors that I think turned out to be quiet

Poland, although in some ways you know it's also obvious, but it had an effect on them. and the general conversation about the quality of human thinking. It was a contribution and- and if I had to pick another, it would be I suppose it would be this asymmetry between gains and mosses against I think that is widely known, but we brought it into the conversation in a way that haven't existed before and then further to that has there been to your knowledge, some concrete reaction, either at government level or in the private sector or in academia or an education somewhere. That you think, was an improvement that resulted from your work that you were

most appreciative of well. You know it's not always directly aiming in our work has been applied in many places in attempts to reduce miser, improve the quality of judgment, but indirectly and well Fairly directly or work had an impact on and behavioral economics, If you think that behavioral economics and not dream, an official them. We made a contribution to the we ve been talking a lot about and much of the book and your work focuses on recurring decision making and whether predictive or not, you can make a judgement about the accuracy of the higher presumably as you point out by seeing how that particular person did when they were hired for the job today meet expectations, did they not do the same with sports? You can do the same with lots of other things.

but there's another kind of decision. That is very important in the world which refer to a singular decisions. And those things are not capable of repetition? You give various examples. Example, the came to my mind when I was reading was the cuban missile crisis. and you say in a way that I'd never occurred to me before that, whereas people in your field, psychology and economics in other areas focus on recurring decisions to figure out ways to make that decision, making better and in home it and improve it and reduce noise. These kinds of singular decisions, whether to cuban missile crisis or something else, are largely relegated to historians and people like that. Explain a folks what your work means for this distinct category of singular decision, something that had been occurs wants, big deal in someone's life, but it's not gonna happen again. How do you make those decisions or main point actually on this? Is that the There is little difference that there appears to be, and

review. Whenever I collapse, ages came up with a sentence that I think is really very up when he said that a unique event is repeated event that happens only there is no essential difference between unique events and repeated to accept a unique events, don't recur, but I think you ought to be thinking about the events in the same way that you ought to be thinking about repeated events that is whatever prescriptions, that decision, hygiene or other prescriptions you have to improve. The quality of thinking about recurrent Ebay that should there is. There is no reason on earth not to apply the same rules and the same improved mode of thinking to singular ribbons and among those things are worth including taking some time to make a decision.

including personal decisions and including momentous decisions. There is no food Bruce way of thinking. The world is an uncertain place. You can make the best judgment and it won't work. You can make that judgment. That would work out beautifully The odds here that is, we are looking for ways of thinking that, on average do better than others those ways of thinking you can study them in repeated situations. But what turns out to be good in repeated situations? Will

now to be you know, there is no reason to believe that its any different and singular deceived. There's an interesting prescription that I think you give when you talk about free throws. We referred earlier. There are people in sports who don't think necessarily somebody is lucky. You now has a hot hands at the roulette table or a crab stable and in LAS Vegas, but there is a belief in streaks. What does your will tell you about a belief in a sports streak? Well, that belief is exaggerated, they're all streaks. Clearly they stopped success on successive successor,

trials is not independent, they're, all streaks, but people believed and strikes us as the exaggerated. We see the world does much more organised and as much more structured than it really is it there's something that you could have studied some years ago. It is an area of inquiry that you wish. You can go back and do more work on. I left a programmer. I left field of happiness and studies, because egg I couldn't see my way too

clear resolution of what is more important than life life, satisfaction of happiness and, to some extent I wish I had stayed with it, a the more I think, Danny Daniel economy. Congratulations again on the book noise. I flung human judgment and, let me repeat, it's been a huge treat to speak with you and to learn from you, not just in this interview, but in your book in your prior book and other writings. Thank you for your service to the country and the water. Two. It was a pleasure. My conversation with Daniel economy continues for members of the kind they insider community to try. The membership free for two weeks had the cafe dot com. Slash insider again, that's cafe dot com, slash insider!

and one of them to show this. We gonna quit personal note. As many of you know. If you follow me and social media, I took a trip last week It started become a tradition, my family, that, before one of my kids go to college, there's a compelled father kid trip. Where first positive, my daughter, two years ago to New Orleans. But there was a hurricane, so he went to Boston. and this you're thinking about where I would take my eighteen year old Son, also college bound in a few weeks. Sadly, for me and my wife, but happily for him and his future he's a country music fan, the biggest country, music fan and the family, and we thought when I go to Nashville so Lester, They went and listened to lot of music had a great time bonded, a little bit as a measure of how good a kid my son is, he even laughs at Dad jokes made by his own but there is no mention all. This is your nerve international before so I put a collar on twitter that toxic platform that were always complaining

That's it. I'm taken my Son and Asheville. Do you have any thoughts and recommendations, and I got an outpouring of communications from people, tweets texts, emails, direct messages. From people who showed how much pride they have in their city and was moving and touching to get that reaction and emanations you made about food places and music venues and museums and other sites the sea in Nashville actually shaped our trip, We did some of the obvious things like other countries all the same in a Johnny Cash museum. But then there are other things that may not have occurred to us like a spot called the merciless

and a restaurant called Arnold's that served at bluegrass, music at lunch and all the berries hot chicken places that are the pride of Nashville. So I want to thank folks for just taking the time to help me and my son plan. Our trip Nashville was a great place. Great music, great food. Great people can't wait to go back. Said for this episode of stay tuned, thanks again to my guest doktor, Daniel economy. If you like what we do rate, review the show an apple pie casts or wherever you listen. Every pause, review helps new listeners, find the shell send me questions about news, politics and justice tweet them to me at Pre Ferrara with the hashtag asked breed

We can call and leave me a message at six hundred and sixty nine, two hundred and forty seven, seven thousand three hundred and thirty, eight at six, six thousand nine hundred and twenty four preet or you can send an email to stay tuned at cafe stay tuned is presented by CAFE studios and the Vocs media podcast network. Your host is preparing the executive producer. Is tomorrow supper the senior producers at a smaller the technical director is David TAT ashore. The cafe team is Matthew. Billy David Calendar, SAM overstating Noah Ally, not wiener, Jake, Kaplan, Chris Boiling and Sean wash their music is by Andrew Dost. I'm prepared statement.