Speaker 1: Media. Something strange is going on. Another member of the
Speaker 1: Russian elite has been found dead.
Speaker 2: Reports suggests that he fell out of a window poisoned
Speaker 2: with mushrooms.
Speaker 1: He died of heart failure, died of carbon monoxide poisoning.
Speaker 2: How comesy are they?
Speaker 1: Dozens of Russian oligachs, politically motivated millionaires have died in
Speaker 1: the space of three years, most of them in suspicious circumstances.
Speaker 1: Many have hidden links to the Kremlin. This is sad
Speaker 1: Oligach Season two, an ongoing investigation into these recently dead
Speaker 1: Russian power brokers. Sad Oligach is created by me jake
Speaker 1: Hanrahan and my Ukrainian colleague Sergey Slipchenkov. This is a
Speaker 1: H eleven studio and Coolso Media production. January where He's
Speaker 1: sixth twenty twenty six, Paris, France, Thirty eight year old
Speaker 1: Russian journalist Yevgeny Safronov is extremely stressed out. He's been hacked.
Speaker 1: All of his social media accounts Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, VK,
Speaker 1: the Lot, even his Telegram channel has been hijacked. He's
Speaker 1: been targeted by nefarious operators on the other side of
Speaker 1: the world. Safronov lives in a small apartment in the
Speaker 1: Hartster Scene suburb in Paris. It's a nice area, mostly clean,
Speaker 1: accessible and with a generally low crime rate. He's here
Speaker 1: because he's in a self induced exile. The newspaper he
Speaker 1: worked for back in Russia was deemed to be a
Speaker 1: traitorous publication. In twenty twenty one, it was slaped with
Speaker 1: the Foreign Act designation by the Kremlin, essentially classing it
Speaker 1: as an enemy of the state. The paper was critical
Speaker 1: of Putin's regime, and at this stage we all know
Speaker 1: what happens when you cross the dictator's red line. It's
Speaker 1: at this stage that Safronov took the wire's decision to flee.
Speaker 1: He left Russia for good, taking himself into exile for
Speaker 1: fear of being arrested and sent to prison. He'd basically
Speaker 1: just been doing his job, but as a real journalist
Speaker 1: in Russia, that's a very dangerous activity. At first, Safronov
Speaker 1: stayed with his newspaper and relocated with most of the
Speaker 1: other staff members. This provided him continued income and a
Speaker 1: visa to live elsewhere. He was doing okay and learning
Speaker 1: to adapt to a life outside of his home country,
Speaker 1: but for reasons currently unknown, he was fired in late
Speaker 1: twenty twenty four. After all that, Safronov was let go, evil,
Speaker 1: the threats from the Russian government, the fear, all of
Speaker 1: it was seemingly for nothing. He had to move on
Speaker 1: once again and spent his time drifting through India and Turkey. Eventually,
Speaker 1: Safronov managed to secure himself a visa to live in France.
Speaker 1: Considering the area he moved to, it's safe to say
Speaker 1: that he either had some cash left over, had a
Speaker 1: trust fund like many journalists, or had found a new
Speaker 1: work pretty quickly. Back in his apartment, Safronov is pacing
Speaker 1: up and down. Anxiety grips him. He's in a terrible state.
Speaker 1: He lost his job, his reputation, and his safety inside
Speaker 1: his own country. He's depressed, to say the least. He's
Speaker 1: popping pills medication. What he's taken exactly is currently unknown,
Speaker 1: but it's worth noting he's on something. He sits at
Speaker 1: his desk and begins at writing letters. One of them
Speaker 1: is a suicide note. Scrawling across the page. In Russian,
Speaker 1: he writes, quote, all my accounts have been hacked. My
Speaker 1: Telegram account has been stolen, all my mobile phones and
Speaker 1: applications have been cloned. My text messages and phone conversations
Speaker 1: have been intercepted. My phone has been infected by hackers.
Speaker 1: I am the only one to blame for my death.
Speaker 1: You can also blame my negligence. I understand that I
Speaker 1: have disappointed many people. I have no excuses except that
Speaker 1: I didn't want to hurt anyone. I have never worked
Speaker 1: for Russia's interests, and I have never been recruited by anyone.
Speaker 1: End quote. He finishes this letter and leaves it for
Speaker 1: his roommate to find.
Speaker 2: It.
Speaker 1: Seems his final will and testament is strangely mostly about
Speaker 1: getting hacked. With this, Safronov pulls a chair to the
Speaker 1: window of his apartment. He's on the seventh floor, a
Speaker 1: solid sixty feet up, maybe more. At this site, you've
Speaker 1: got an eighty percent chance of death if you hit
Speaker 1: the asphalt below. Safronov is about to test these odds.
Speaker 1: His paranoia, his stress, his depression, it's all hit fever, pitch. Sadly,
Speaker 1: he doesn't feel as if there's any other way out
Speaker 1: of this nightmare he's going through. Safronov steps up onto
Speaker 1: the chair and positions himself at the open window below him.
Speaker 1: The ground is finished with a thin layer of French tarmac.
Speaker 1: Older stone cobbles separate the road from the pavement. What
Speaker 1: goes through his mind at this point is between him
Speaker 1: and his god. Safronov jumps. He hurtles to the floor
Speaker 1: of forty miles per hour. It takes him almost two seconds,
Speaker 1: but he hits the road flat out. Instantly his body
Speaker 1: meets ground. Safronov is dead, lights out. That is the
Speaker 1: official story. We only know about this recent death due
Speaker 1: to sparse reporting on it in French and a little
Speaker 1: bit in Russian. As is strangely with all sad Oligarch cases,
Speaker 1: there are conflicting reports on what happened, even basic details.
Speaker 1: For example, it's still not known if Safronov's housemate was
Speaker 1: at the apartment when he jumped or not. He could
Speaker 1: have come by afterwards, or he could have been in
Speaker 1: his own room. We don't know. It's reported that the
Speaker 1: housemate was apparently in so much shock that he couldn't
Speaker 1: even give a statement to police. Some reports say it
Speaker 1: wasn't the shock though, it was more the language barrier,
Speaker 1: as he only spoke Russian. But that makes no sense
Speaker 1: to me, as any police force in any capital city
Speaker 1: has dozens and dozens of translators on tap. They could
Speaker 1: have gotten hold of a Russian speaking translator very easily.
Speaker 1: There are estimated fifty thousand Russian speakers living in Paris alone,
Speaker 1: many more across France who have phones. Now this doesn't
Speaker 1: speak to any kind of grand conspiracy or anything, but
Speaker 1: I do still find it quite unusual how this hasn't
Speaker 1: been treated as something a bit more newsworthy in France,
Speaker 1: especially considering current geopolitical events. Think about it, a Russian
Speaker 1: dissident jumped from a window to his death on the
Speaker 1: street in the middle of Paris, after saying all of
Speaker 1: his devices and social medias were hacked, and yet the
Speaker 1: event seems to have come and gone already. This happened
Speaker 1: this month. In fact, the way that we found out
Speaker 1: that Yevgeny Safronov died was not from reporting in the news.
Speaker 1: He wasn't actually named at first. It was just a
Speaker 1: Russian freelance journalist has committed suicide, that was it. He
Speaker 1: was actually another Russian journalist who first broke the news
Speaker 1: that it was Safronov who died. This other reporter, Dennis Balashov,
Speaker 1: also based in Paris, posted a photo of Safronov on
Speaker 1: his telegram channel in January with the following caption quote.
Speaker 1: At the end of twenty twenty four, Safronov suffered as
Speaker 1: he claimed an unfair dismissal from his media outlet that
Speaker 1: had relocated to Europe. As a result, he was unable
Speaker 1: to renew his documents and was forced to leave his
Speaker 1: country of residence and wander through India and Istanbul until
Speaker 1: he received a French visa. Six months ago. He moved
Speaker 1: to Paris and tried to settle here. He was depressed.
Speaker 1: End quote. Now, I don't know about you, but that
Speaker 1: is one of the most blunt and coldest eulogies I
Speaker 1: have ever read. Now to understand that Safronov's situation a
Speaker 1: little clearer, let's take a look into the media company
Speaker 1: he was working for that had apparently fired him not
Speaker 1: that long ago. This company is called Open Media, and surprise,
Speaker 1: it's owned by a big Russian oligarch. It's called Open Media,
Speaker 1: and the company fell out of favor with Putin when
Speaker 1: the oligach did. Let's talk to Sergey to find out.
Speaker 2: More him working for Open Media founded by Michael Kodowski,
Speaker 2: who was he was an Alger himself, but he fell
Speaker 2: out with Putin way back in like the early two thousands,
Speaker 2: like the photos of him being with Putin, working with Putin,
Speaker 2: So he was like in his circle at some point,
Speaker 2: and then he fell out of favor and he founded
Speaker 2: this news media. Now he's kind of labeled as a
Speaker 2: Putin critic, but it seems like he was, you know,
Speaker 2: from ninety from the nineties to the early two thousands,
Speaker 2: he was kind of, if not buddy buddy with him,
Speaker 2: he was involved with Putin somehow. So I don't know
Speaker 2: how big of a critic he.
Speaker 1: Is, Okay now with time for a quick outbreak, right,
Speaker 1: not for that. Now back to the show.
Speaker 2: It kind of seems one of those situations where well,
Speaker 2: now he's kind of like on the bad side of Putin,
Speaker 2: so he's so he's now criticizing him, you know, But
Speaker 2: when he was kind of benefiting from that relationship, he
Speaker 2: was completely.
Speaker 1: Fine with it. Do we know what he was criticizing, That.
Speaker 2: It's not a democracy and that Puttin is like a dictator.
Speaker 2: I didn't see anything too specific, but it seems like
Speaker 2: the publication itself is kind of like openly anti Putin regime.
Speaker 1: Now, this situation with open media where it's being run
Speaker 1: by an oligarch that is suddenly anti Putin is actually
Speaker 1: quite a common thing in Russia. Many of the so
Speaker 1: called this an outlet, well, once upon a time friends
Speaker 1: with the regime. They eventually fell out, and the publication
Speaker 1: then turncoats as the oligarch that owns it does. Now
Speaker 1: that's not to say that all of Russian dissident media
Speaker 1: is like that, not at all. There are several outlets
Speaker 1: that genuinely are against the regime, against the Kremlin based
Speaker 1: on their own want for freedom, morals and ethics. But
Speaker 1: many a time so called opposition leaders, particularly ones that
Speaker 1: are lauded in the West, often have a tricky, if
Speaker 1: not murky background. Anyway, let's get back to the conversation
Speaker 1: with Sergey. So this guy I was working for a
Speaker 1: oligarch newspaper essentially.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so it's like, even though it's kind of reporting
Speaker 2: more of like his corruption and things that are against Puttin, right, So, like,
Speaker 2: I think most people will see that as a good thing,
Speaker 2: it's still definitely influenced and it's owned by an oligarch, right,
Speaker 2: So like, yeah, it's reporting the kind of the bad
Speaker 2: side of Russian government, but also like there's definitely gonna
Speaker 2: be a bias in that right, Even if you agree
Speaker 2: with it and you kind of support, like yeah, fuck Russia,
Speaker 2: you still have to realize that there is a bias
Speaker 2: where it's again a Russian oligarch that owns this project
Speaker 2: and is running it. It sounds like funding it as well. Yeah,
Speaker 2: it's owned by him. It's kind of influenced by him
Speaker 2: to some degree.
Speaker 1: I'm sure. Now let's just pause for a second here
Speaker 1: to talk about how media is influenced by oligarchy. Lots
Speaker 1: of media. Well, I'm about to say I have said
Speaker 1: since episode one of season one of Sad Oligarch, and
Speaker 1: I've tried to dump it into people's heads where appropriate.
Speaker 1: Our so called Western superpowers are run by oligarchs as
Speaker 1: much as Russia. It's you might not call them that,
Speaker 1: and perhaps they're a little more crafty in how they
Speaker 1: influence our day to day lives. But Western oligarchs are
Speaker 1: fucking us as much as our politicians are, particularly when
Speaker 1: it comes to the open and free media of the West. Often,
Speaker 1: our media, particularly the big publications, is structurally biased because
Speaker 1: big outlets sit inside big power networks, billionaires, influential families,
Speaker 1: private equity, and politically connected executive thoughts. These are a
Speaker 1: menace for truly free journalism. Now, control might not look
Speaker 1: the same as it sometimes does in Russia, where for example,
Speaker 1: a Kremlin stooge might call up a paper, tell them
Speaker 1: to shut up, or even send the police to raid them,
Speaker 1: but it's still often very, very corrupt. Usually it's more
Speaker 1: of a deceptive control dog a little more behind the scenes.
Speaker 1: The owners of a publication might hire editors who share
Speaker 1: their beliefs in political propaganda. They might spike investigations that
Speaker 1: could be awkward for their friends, or they simply might
Speaker 1: support a genocidal rogue state and as sure to dampen
Speaker 1: any criticism against said rogue state as it murders children
Speaker 1: with bombs paid for by a rapidly declining superpower. Then
Speaker 1: there's the soft control via access. Notice, these days you
Speaker 1: will not see as many reporters taking politicians to task
Speaker 1: properly in interviews or when scuttling over to the ridiculous
Speaker 1: government press briefings. Why well, if they ruffle too many feathers,
Speaker 1: they will lose access, and they might even lose their
Speaker 1: beat at whichever publication they're at. So anyway, billionaire influence
Speaker 1: is rife. Take The Washington Post, for example, it's now
Speaker 1: owned by the possible demon Jeff Bezos, after he bought
Speaker 1: it for two hundred and fifty million dollars. When the
Speaker 1: owner is a megawealthy corporate figure Bezos is worth around
Speaker 1: two hundred and fifty four billion, there's an obvious incentive
Speaker 1: to avoid any serious investigations that threaten the owner's network
Speaker 1: of goons. And of course, due to horrible work practices
Speaker 1: at Amazon. Listen to my series A Megacorp to hear
Speaker 1: all about that. Bezos does not want his reporters focused
Speaker 1: too heavily on regulation, antitrust, label organizing, defense contracting, stuff
Speaker 1: like that. In the UK, the daily Male titles sit
Speaker 1: under the ownership of the Rothmere family. They control it all.
Speaker 1: So I want to purchase the very popular conservative newspaper,
Speaker 1: The Telegraph. Government documents discussing this proposed deal explicitly note
Speaker 1: plurality concerns. They're worried that one family's consolidation of media
Speaker 1: means consolidation of influence. Of course this is obvious, but
Speaker 1: that's what our tax pays for. In the UK, for
Speaker 1: politicians to sit around writing up papers, they can be
Speaker 1: deeply concerned with then you've got the worst of the worst,
Speaker 1: the nightmarish demon hell that is the Murdoch Empire news court,
Speaker 1: publisher of The Wall Street Journal, The Times, The New
Speaker 1: York Post, The Sun and many more. They also control
Speaker 1: Fox Corporation, as I'm sure you're aware, Fox's opinion programming
Speaker 1: and Murdoch's politics are so intertwined. Basically now a case
Speaker 1: study in partisan media power, influential political bias, and unfortunately
Speaker 1: they are very successful. The Murdoch family can and have
Speaker 1: literally influenced elections at the drop of a hat. I
Speaker 1: could go on and on about this sort of thing
Speaker 1: in the media, but you get the gist by now.
Speaker 1: A point being let's just remember that here in the West,
Speaker 1: we are not holier than thou. We suffer very similar
Speaker 1: problems with corruption and oligarchy, even if our media often
Speaker 1: chooses to sugarcoat it because that will benefit their owners.
Speaker 1: Now let's get back to Yevgeny Safronov. It's worth noting
Speaker 1: that before he had to go into exile from Russia,
Speaker 1: he was actually detained. In twenty twenty one, authorities brought
Speaker 1: him in for reporting on Novalni's court trial and criminal
Speaker 1: case in Russia. Now if you don't remember, Alexi Navalni
Speaker 1: was Russia's most prominent anti corruption campaigner and opposition figure
Speaker 1: to Putin. He was known for exposing shenanigans at the
Speaker 1: elite level in the Kremlin, to put it lightly, and
Speaker 1: he survived a twenty twenty nerve agent poisoning, which is
Speaker 1: very clearly an act of the Russian regime. Navalny was
Speaker 1: lauded as a hero in the West, but if you
Speaker 1: dig in a little deeper, he did have a pretty
Speaker 1: checkered past. But that's not to say he deserved anything
Speaker 1: that the Kremlin did to him. He eventually died in
Speaker 1: February twenty twenty four in a very remote Arctic prison colony,
Speaker 1: while serving a hefty sentence widely viewed internationally as a
Speaker 1: politically motivated punishment dished out by a Putin for Novalni's
Speaker 1: outspoken opposition to him. During the trial, Saffronov got caught
Speaker 1: up in the mix and was arrested. He was released,
Speaker 1: and there's not a lot of details on why. Surgery
Speaker 1: has a theory.
Speaker 2: I think again it might have been more to do
Speaker 2: with the publication that he was working for. I couldn't
Speaker 2: see that he did anything like specifically like out there
Speaker 2: that would have him targeted. They were pretty adamant in
Speaker 2: reporting on it, calling out the government and stuff, and
Speaker 2: I think maybe just being the publication that it was
Speaker 2: was enough for him to be kind of targeted. And
Speaker 2: again the entire publication got labeled as a foreign agent,
Speaker 2: which essentially lets Russia do pretty much anything with it,
Speaker 2: you know, kind of arrest arrest there reporters. I mean,
Speaker 2: I think just for propaganda purposes. It's like, oh, this
Speaker 2: publication's influenced, is owned by the West, their foreigners. They're
Speaker 2: trying to like disablize Russia. They're trying to say Russia
Speaker 2: is bad. That's kind of their go to to this
Speaker 2: crediting media.
Speaker 1: Okay, now it's time for a quick break. All right,
Speaker 1: enough for that. Now back to the shot.
Speaker 2: You see this even more often now with the war
Speaker 2: in Ukraine. I think at this point most publications have
Speaker 2: left Russia. But at the beginning of the war, the
Speaker 2: foreign agent thing was easily thrown around to just be like, oh,
Speaker 2: they're reporting that we're doing well in the war. That's
Speaker 2: because they're supporting Western propaganda.
Speaker 1: So what do we know. We know that Yevgeny Safronov
Speaker 1: had several marks on his name as far as the
Speaker 1: Kremlin was concerned. One, he used to work for an
Speaker 1: opposition news outlet whose rich and powerful owner was a
Speaker 1: former friend turned foe of Putin. Two he reported on
Speaker 1: the Navoni trial, pointing out the trumped up charges and
Speaker 1: political motivations of the case. Three he was detained by
Speaker 1: authorities in twenty twenty one for what is essentially wrong speak.
Speaker 1: Four fled Russia as it was at war with Ukraine,
Speaker 1: a big no no. And five he lived in exile
Speaker 1: where he continued to report on Putin's crimes. But is
Speaker 1: this enough to get him killed outside of Russia? Honestly,
Speaker 1: I just don't think so. No disrespect to the Ladyevgeny Saffronov,
Speaker 1: not at all. But he was not a huge influential reporter.
Speaker 1: His work was sure and steady, But it's not like
Speaker 1: he was known for dismantling the Russian regime with his reportage.
Speaker 1: But what about his claims of being hacked. There's two
Speaker 1: sides to this. Notably, the Russians around him say that
Speaker 1: he was becoming paranoid, he was thinking things aren't real. Essentially,
Speaker 1: he was losing the plot a bit. However, the French
Speaker 1: police have a different view. The investigation is, of course
Speaker 1: quietly on go. The cops haven't said much, believe me,
Speaker 1: We've tried to talk to them, but the little they
Speaker 1: did say cast the paranoia claims into doubt. According to
Speaker 1: the French newspaper Laparisian police investigators believe Saffronov had been
Speaker 1: at the target of death threats, real ones, not paranoia.
Speaker 1: At the time of recording these French police have not
Speaker 1: stated a final conclusion to what went on in Paris.
Speaker 1: Russian media, though, seems to have already decided.
Speaker 2: Interestingly, Russian reports on this death label it as like, yep,
Speaker 2: the police said it's a suicide, I need to look further,
Speaker 2: whereas French autists clearly state that the investigation is ongoing
Speaker 2: and they're looking into this, and then they're treating this
Speaker 2: as I don't think they went as far as to
Speaker 2: say suspicious, but they said that, like, while suicide is
Speaker 2: being considered, other things are being investigated. Maybe we'll hear
Speaker 2: something about it in a few weeks, who knows, maybe months.
Speaker 1: The alleged hacking also becomes more interesting when we dig
Speaker 1: a bit deeper. Safronov strangely, in my opinion, spoke about
Speaker 1: his social media being hacked and his simcards cloned in
Speaker 1: a suicide note. Honestly, it's really not that difficult to
Speaker 1: do in this day and age, simswapping, key loggers, social engineering, whatever.
Speaker 1: There are teenagers in their bedrooms doing this every single day,
Speaker 1: and they make money while they're at it. But it
Speaker 1: wasn't just the phones and the socials that got hacked.
Speaker 1: Safronov's Russian citizen Gateway was also taken over. This is
Speaker 1: an online government portal in Russia that allows its people
Speaker 1: to log in and access municipal services. Basically an all
Speaker 1: in one digital hub for accessing official systems. This is
Speaker 1: not easy to hack into. Have to be seriously skilled
Speaker 1: to break Russian government cyber security. Either that or you'd
Speaker 1: have to be Russian cybersecurity. I don't think it's too
Speaker 1: crazy to theorize that maybe someone working for the Kremlin
Speaker 1: was tasked with making Saffronov's life hell from afar. After all,
Speaker 1: Russia's relationship with computer hackers is pretty cozy. The state
Speaker 1: basically tolerates serious hacking so long as they don't target
Speaker 1: anything Russian. There are cases where hackers that have been
Speaker 1: caught doing so are given a choice. Either you face
Speaker 1: the consequences in court and got to prison, or you
Speaker 1: get to continue hacking, but now you work for the Kremlin.
Speaker 1: At the center of this ecosystem the security services, specifically
Speaker 1: the FSB and the GIU. These agencies have long understood
Speaker 1: that their country produces a deep pool of technically gifted programmers,
Speaker 1: many of whom drift quickly into cybercrime. Rather than wiping
Speaker 1: that scene out, the state applies pressure selectively. This creates
Speaker 1: a grazon. Some groups operate as criminals for profits, others
Speaker 1: as patriotic volunteers, and some shift roles depending on the job.
Speaker 1: They're fluid. For example, during geopolitical flare ups, criminal groups
Speaker 1: suddenly pivot to politically useful targets. During quieter periods, they
Speaker 1: return to ransomware and frauds and whatever else it is
Speaker 1: they do. This setup gives the Kremlin ap plausible deniability.
Speaker 1: Attacks can be framed as independent criminal hits even when
Speaker 1: they line up neatly with Russia's strategic interests, which they
Speaker 1: often do. It's cheap, flexible, deniable. The trade off is control. Then,
Speaker 1: Saffronov was pushed out of the window, but in a
Speaker 1: different way. It wasn't the hands of Putin henchmen that
Speaker 1: shoved him, but a targeted hacking campaign that sent him
Speaker 1: over the edge. As far as psychological pressure operations go,
Speaker 1: this is not at all implausible. Just take a look
Speaker 1: at what the CIA and the FBI were up to
Speaker 1: in America in the seventies and eighties and onward. None
Speaker 1: of this ever truly ceased, and no governments are immune
Speaker 1: to attacking their own citizens, especially not Russia. This has
Speaker 1: been sad Oligarch season two. Honestly, it's been absolute chaos.
Speaker 1: Sergei Slipchenko, Victor Mihail and myself have never had to
Speaker 1: dig so deep for so few leads. One thing that's
Speaker 1: clear after doing this series is that unfortunately the Kremlin's
Speaker 1: violent tactics are working. People are much more scared to
Speaker 1: speak out. The strange deaths become more brazen, the threat
Speaker 1: becomes more apparent. What's more, Putin is still murdering people
Speaker 1: across the world, and no one who can is willing
Speaker 1: to stop him. It's sad to say, but we're in
Speaker 1: for some very hard times ahead. I would like to
Speaker 1: dedicate this series to all the people who fought and
Speaker 1: died in Ukraine trying to free themselves from the grip
Speaker 1: of Russia's violent imperialism. Especially to the friends I made
Speaker 1: when reporting out there. Those who died heroically on the
Speaker 1: front lines, Rest in peace to Yuriso Malenko, Ramasova and
Speaker 1: our friend are popular front mag dump. This is the
Speaker 1: end of sad Oligach. Thank you for listening. You've been
Speaker 1: listening to sad Oliga season two. Produced by H eleven
Speaker 1: Studios for Cool Zone Media. Writing, editing, producing, concept and
Speaker 1: recording by myself, Jake Hanrahan, Research and reporting by Sergei Slipchenko,
Speaker 1: me and Victim Mihail. Executive producing by Sophie Lichtman. Music
Speaker 1: by Sam Black, art work by George Zutful. Sound mixed
Speaker 1: by Splicing Block. See my other projects at Hanrahan dot tv.
Speaker 1: Get me on social media at Jake Wonder School Hanrahn.
Speaker 1: That's h A N I M h A n.