WEBVTT - Short Stuff: Redacted!

0:00:04.240 --> 0:00:06.320
<v Speaker 1>Hey, and welcome to the Short Stuff. I'm Josh, and

0:00:06.440 --> 0:00:09.720
<v Speaker 1>Chuck's here as always, Dave's here, and Spirit Cherry's here

0:00:09.720 --> 0:00:12.920
<v Speaker 1>in Spirit. They're both alive. Don't worry, they're just not

0:00:13.039 --> 0:00:15.960
<v Speaker 1>here with us right now. And that makes this short stuff.

0:00:16.640 --> 0:00:18.080
<v Speaker 2>That's because they're at Spirit Halloween.

0:00:19.600 --> 0:00:22.720
<v Speaker 1>That's true. They both got extra side hustles, as they're called.

0:00:24.360 --> 0:00:26.079
<v Speaker 2>We just got a bunch of new Halloween stuff. Emily

0:00:26.160 --> 0:00:28.120
<v Speaker 2>really wants to ramp up our Halloween game.

0:00:28.440 --> 0:00:31.800
<v Speaker 1>Oh nice, we got one last year. We got a big, tall,

0:00:31.920 --> 0:00:34.680
<v Speaker 1>scary guy who's holding a baby upside down and they

0:00:34.680 --> 0:00:37.800
<v Speaker 1>both like the baby screams. Not a baby, let's say

0:00:37.800 --> 0:00:38.320
<v Speaker 1>a toddler.

0:00:38.760 --> 0:00:40.200
<v Speaker 2>Does it suck the breath out of the baby?

0:00:40.520 --> 0:00:44.000
<v Speaker 1>No, it just holds her by her leg upside down

0:00:44.600 --> 0:00:47.800
<v Speaker 1>and she screams a lot. And the guy's like, and

0:00:47.840 --> 0:00:51.479
<v Speaker 1>it's pretty great. I mean, this is a huge step

0:00:51.560 --> 0:00:54.600
<v Speaker 1>up from what we normally do, which is a like

0:00:54.600 --> 0:00:57.720
<v Speaker 1>a paper mache pumpkin and a sign that says get away.

0:00:58.480 --> 0:01:00.760
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. Yeah. The reason I ask about the breath as

0:01:00.800 --> 0:01:05.360
<v Speaker 2>there's a legendary figure that you can, like this giant

0:01:05.400 --> 0:01:07.400
<v Speaker 2>that you can put on your front porch where the

0:01:07.480 --> 0:01:11.360
<v Speaker 2>dude holds up a toddler and it has I guess

0:01:11.720 --> 0:01:13.759
<v Speaker 2>steam or smoke or something, and it looks like it's

0:01:13.760 --> 0:01:15.800
<v Speaker 2>sucking the breath out of this child.

0:01:16.120 --> 0:01:16.480
<v Speaker 1>Wow.

0:01:16.520 --> 0:01:20.360
<v Speaker 2>And our friends of the show, John Hodgman and Jesse Thorn,

0:01:20.520 --> 0:01:24.880
<v Speaker 2>talked a lot about it on their Judge John Hodgman podcast, which,

0:01:24.959 --> 0:01:26.160
<v Speaker 2>by the way, is on tour. If you want to

0:01:26.160 --> 0:01:27.640
<v Speaker 2>go see those guys on tour. It's a lot of fun.

0:01:27.880 --> 0:01:30.440
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, they'll take your breath away for sure seeing them live.

0:01:31.000 --> 0:01:34.000
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, So just go go check out Judge John Hodgman Tour.

0:01:34.040 --> 0:01:35.640
<v Speaker 2>It's a fun show and you never know who might

0:01:35.640 --> 0:01:38.120
<v Speaker 2>show up. Might be me, might be Josh Man.

0:01:38.160 --> 0:01:40.240
<v Speaker 1>Hodgman knows you some money for that segue.

0:01:40.280 --> 0:01:43.039
<v Speaker 2>That was amazing and spirit Halloweencot.

0:01:43.120 --> 0:01:44.920
<v Speaker 1>I'm still trying to figure out how you worked it.

0:01:44.959 --> 0:01:45.680
<v Speaker 1>And that was great.

0:01:46.240 --> 0:01:48.640
<v Speaker 2>All right, Well, we've wasted two of our twelve minutes,

0:01:48.680 --> 0:01:49.800
<v Speaker 2>so let's talk about redaction.

0:01:50.000 --> 0:01:52.760
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, Chuck, redaction. We definitely touched on it in our

0:01:52.800 --> 0:01:56.800
<v Speaker 1>Foyer episode for sure, but just to kind of refresh everybody.

0:01:56.840 --> 0:02:01.760
<v Speaker 1>Redaction is where there's parts of documents or transcripts or

0:02:01.800 --> 0:02:05.160
<v Speaker 1>something like that that are so sensitive that they have

0:02:05.240 --> 0:02:09.000
<v Speaker 1>to be essentially removed. They're usually blacked out. Is the

0:02:09.040 --> 0:02:11.840
<v Speaker 1>traditional way that you know, you think of redaction, but

0:02:12.000 --> 0:02:13.680
<v Speaker 1>it turns out there's a lot of other types of

0:02:13.720 --> 0:02:16.760
<v Speaker 1>redaction and ways to do it, and tons of reasons.

0:02:16.760 --> 0:02:19.320
<v Speaker 1>It's not just because you asked the CIA for a

0:02:19.320 --> 0:02:22.359
<v Speaker 1>bunch of documents. There's a lot of different groups that

0:02:22.520 --> 0:02:23.960
<v Speaker 1>react on the regular.

0:02:24.720 --> 0:02:28.200
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, for sure, you mentioned FOYA, the Freedom of Information Act.

0:02:28.200 --> 0:02:30.560
<v Speaker 2>If you've ever laid your eyes on something as a

0:02:30.600 --> 0:02:34.720
<v Speaker 2>request from that Act, then you will probably see a

0:02:34.760 --> 0:02:38.040
<v Speaker 2>bunch of sharpie magic marker through names and places, maybe

0:02:38.160 --> 0:02:41.799
<v Speaker 2>entire pages redacted. But it's often thought of as a

0:02:41.840 --> 0:02:45.079
<v Speaker 2>government thing, but like you said, a lot of sometimes

0:02:45.120 --> 0:02:48.200
<v Speaker 2>like a court will order that to protect sensitive information.

0:02:49.320 --> 0:02:53.400
<v Speaker 2>In the medical field, obviously, there's the Health Insurance Portability

0:02:53.400 --> 0:02:56.120
<v Speaker 2>and Accountability Act, the hip hop thing that you always

0:02:56.160 --> 0:02:58.959
<v Speaker 2>hear about it the doctor. It's you know, your medical privacy,

0:02:59.080 --> 0:03:04.520
<v Speaker 2>so they might order a redaction there. Your grades and

0:03:04.560 --> 0:03:08.960
<v Speaker 2>your schooling is private thanks to the Family Educational Rights

0:03:08.960 --> 0:03:12.560
<v Speaker 2>and Privacy Act, so your educational records could be redacted

0:03:12.600 --> 0:03:14.399
<v Speaker 2>if it was brought into court. That kind of thing

0:03:14.480 --> 0:03:14.880
<v Speaker 2>for sure.

0:03:15.400 --> 0:03:18.440
<v Speaker 1>And then speaking of court, the legal world is huge unredaction.

0:03:18.560 --> 0:03:21.720
<v Speaker 1>They're riduculously.

0:03:24.400 --> 0:03:26.399
<v Speaker 2>That one really got me, actually, that one.

0:03:26.680 --> 0:03:29.639
<v Speaker 1>That in particular in the legal world, redaction is usually

0:03:29.680 --> 0:03:33.880
<v Speaker 1>associated with civil cases because there's a process of discovery

0:03:34.280 --> 0:03:36.280
<v Speaker 1>where it's like, give me all the documents you have

0:03:36.400 --> 0:03:39.160
<v Speaker 1>pertaining to this case, and I'll give you all the

0:03:39.160 --> 0:03:41.120
<v Speaker 1>documents I have, and if not, we'll get in big,

0:03:41.160 --> 0:03:43.960
<v Speaker 1>big trouble if we don't do that. Right, But in

0:03:44.000 --> 0:03:48.440
<v Speaker 1>those documents there's inevitably stuff that doesn't pertain to the case.

0:03:49.640 --> 0:03:55.000
<v Speaker 1>There's protected like say copyrighted or trademarked or patented information

0:03:55.240 --> 0:03:57.480
<v Speaker 1>like trade secrets can be in there. If there's a

0:03:57.520 --> 0:04:01.600
<v Speaker 1>company involved, there's people not related to the case who

0:04:01.720 --> 0:04:04.800
<v Speaker 1>may be emailed about something or we're just CC you

0:04:04.840 --> 0:04:05.600
<v Speaker 1>want to get rid of that.

0:04:06.240 --> 0:04:07.840
<v Speaker 2>There's any client privilege, of course.

0:04:07.960 --> 0:04:11.600
<v Speaker 1>Exactly, there's a lot of reasons to redact in legal cases,

0:04:12.160 --> 0:04:16.120
<v Speaker 1>and there's a certain way to do it. And yet

0:04:16.880 --> 0:04:19.920
<v Speaker 1>regardless of all these reasons that people have to redact

0:04:19.920 --> 0:04:23.560
<v Speaker 1>in all these fields that are like required to redact

0:04:23.600 --> 0:04:29.360
<v Speaker 1>things like hippa requires the medical field to redact, there's

0:04:29.440 --> 0:04:32.479
<v Speaker 1>not actually like a prescribed way like and this is

0:04:32.520 --> 0:04:34.800
<v Speaker 1>how you do it. It's more like you need to

0:04:34.839 --> 0:04:36.880
<v Speaker 1>redact this and go figure out how to do that,

0:04:37.320 --> 0:04:38.880
<v Speaker 1>and then if you do it wrong, you're going to

0:04:38.920 --> 0:04:40.000
<v Speaker 1>get your pants suit off.

0:04:40.640 --> 0:04:42.960
<v Speaker 2>That's right, And shall we take a break and talk

0:04:42.960 --> 0:04:46.599
<v Speaker 2>of about the myriad ways that you can do so, yeah,

0:04:46.880 --> 0:05:09.760
<v Speaker 2>all right, we'll be right back. All right. So you

0:05:09.800 --> 0:05:13.400
<v Speaker 2>mentioned that there are not any set rules in place

0:05:13.440 --> 0:05:16.479
<v Speaker 2>about how to redact something. It's up to the redactor

0:05:17.360 --> 0:05:19.680
<v Speaker 2>what you will usually see. And if you've ever seen

0:05:19.720 --> 0:05:24.120
<v Speaker 2>government documents on the news or whatever, you usually will

0:05:24.200 --> 0:05:28.119
<v Speaker 2>just see like a black magic marker drawn through names,

0:05:28.120 --> 0:05:30.840
<v Speaker 2>and not through a name, but like completely over a name,

0:05:31.520 --> 0:05:34.360
<v Speaker 2>or it's not always a name, just whatever you're redacting. Again,

0:05:34.400 --> 0:05:38.279
<v Speaker 2>it could be sentences or wold pages or paragraphs. And

0:05:38.320 --> 0:05:41.159
<v Speaker 2>then what you should do then is then make a

0:05:41.200 --> 0:05:44.039
<v Speaker 2>copy of that otherwise someone and this has happened plenty

0:05:44.080 --> 0:05:46.280
<v Speaker 2>of times. If you give that person the original, you

0:05:46.279 --> 0:05:48.080
<v Speaker 2>can just hold it up to the light many times

0:05:48.440 --> 0:05:51.359
<v Speaker 2>and see what's going on. If you photocopy it, you can't.

0:05:51.440 --> 0:05:55.520
<v Speaker 2>So that's a pretty good old school way to do.

0:05:55.600 --> 0:05:58.680
<v Speaker 1>So, yeah, you, me and I watched The Amber heard

0:05:58.760 --> 0:06:01.719
<v Speaker 1>Johnny Depp lost suit a couple of years.

0:06:01.560 --> 0:06:04.280
<v Speaker 2>Ago on the trial and TV.

0:06:04.520 --> 0:06:08.200
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and that's where I learned that that's what you're

0:06:08.240 --> 0:06:12.000
<v Speaker 1>supposed to do from some lawyers who analyzed it like

0:06:12.279 --> 0:06:15.720
<v Speaker 1>just about every night, and they said, apparently the reason

0:06:15.720 --> 0:06:17.960
<v Speaker 1>they brought it up is because somebody was holding a

0:06:18.000 --> 0:06:21.120
<v Speaker 1>document and on the TV camera it was the original

0:06:21.240 --> 0:06:24.440
<v Speaker 1>just with it blacked out, and apparently the internet could

0:06:24.440 --> 0:06:27.360
<v Speaker 1>read what it was. I think it was somebody's email,

0:06:27.400 --> 0:06:30.440
<v Speaker 1>like maybe even Amber Heerd's email. Oh yeah, And that

0:06:30.600 --> 0:06:32.720
<v Speaker 1>night the lawyers are like, they that's not how you

0:06:32.760 --> 0:06:35.240
<v Speaker 1>do it. You do that with the originals and you

0:06:35.279 --> 0:06:38.200
<v Speaker 1>make a photocopy of the originals, is just not possible

0:06:38.279 --> 0:06:40.839
<v Speaker 1>to see what you've redacted at that point.

0:06:40.920 --> 0:06:42.760
<v Speaker 2>So but a dumb thing to do.

0:06:43.040 --> 0:06:45.720
<v Speaker 1>Oh yeah, dude, that's I mean, what do you do?

0:06:45.839 --> 0:06:48.080
<v Speaker 1>Like are you just like, well, you just gave me

0:06:48.120 --> 0:06:51.039
<v Speaker 1>your services for free? Like what you know? What's what

0:06:51.160 --> 0:06:53.600
<v Speaker 1>happens as a result of that? I'm curious?

0:06:54.160 --> 0:06:55.920
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, me too. Well we'll talk a little bit about

0:06:55.920 --> 0:06:58.880
<v Speaker 2>that at the end. I don't know what happened in

0:06:58.880 --> 0:07:02.479
<v Speaker 2>that case, but what can happen? So yeah, drawing black

0:07:02.480 --> 0:07:04.640
<v Speaker 2>magic marker is good old school way, but you know

0:07:04.680 --> 0:07:06.560
<v Speaker 2>a lot of stuff these days, most stuff, in fact,

0:07:07.080 --> 0:07:11.160
<v Speaker 2>is an electronic form. So people started using software tools

0:07:11.720 --> 0:07:15.960
<v Speaker 2>and you know, like things within a program to essentially

0:07:16.120 --> 0:07:19.280
<v Speaker 2>black magic marker over it. And that can be good.

0:07:19.440 --> 0:07:21.720
<v Speaker 2>But you know, one of the articles I use for

0:07:21.760 --> 0:07:27.600
<v Speaker 2>this talk to an attorney, a DC based national security

0:07:27.640 --> 0:07:30.560
<v Speaker 2>law attorney. He was like, I don't trust it. I

0:07:30.560 --> 0:07:33.600
<v Speaker 2>don't trust technology even if you do that, and maybe

0:07:33.600 --> 0:07:36.560
<v Speaker 2>somebody could design a program to undo that and override it.

0:07:37.040 --> 0:07:39.880
<v Speaker 2>So this guy like he didn't even like the black

0:07:39.920 --> 0:07:42.880
<v Speaker 2>magic marker because I think he's been burned by that before.

0:07:42.960 --> 0:07:47.200
<v Speaker 2>So he cuts everything out literally with scissors, and he said,

0:07:47.280 --> 0:07:51.440
<v Speaker 2>you know, it's kind of sloppy looking, but it make

0:07:51.520 --> 0:07:53.600
<v Speaker 2>sure that no one can see what was there or

0:07:54.000 --> 0:07:57.840
<v Speaker 2>if it's electronic, I might just completely delete the sentence

0:07:57.920 --> 0:08:00.520
<v Speaker 2>or word right and type and type in over that

0:08:00.920 --> 0:08:04.320
<v Speaker 2>in all bold letters deleted by the request of the CIA.

0:08:04.640 --> 0:08:07.360
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and that guy's name is Mark Ze, the lawyer.

0:08:07.560 --> 0:08:10.520
<v Speaker 1>And there's really good reason to actually go in and

0:08:10.640 --> 0:08:15.000
<v Speaker 1>delete the words because there's been at least one case,

0:08:15.080 --> 0:08:18.560
<v Speaker 1>the trial of Paul Manifort, who was on trial for perjury.

0:08:19.000 --> 0:08:21.880
<v Speaker 1>I think lying to the FBI obstruction of justice a

0:08:21.920 --> 0:08:25.600
<v Speaker 1>few things related to that whole Mueller Report investigation of

0:08:26.360 --> 0:08:30.480
<v Speaker 1>Russian interference in the twenty sixteen election. And in that case,

0:08:31.600 --> 0:08:34.480
<v Speaker 1>one of the redacted documents that a journalist from The

0:08:34.480 --> 0:08:39.680
<v Speaker 1>Guardian named John Swain got, all they did was put

0:08:40.080 --> 0:08:44.960
<v Speaker 1>a black bar, like they used the square like draw

0:08:45.040 --> 0:08:48.920
<v Speaker 1>tool in Microsoft Word and filled it in with black

0:08:49.120 --> 0:08:53.640
<v Speaker 1>and sent it out and like John yeah, and John

0:08:53.720 --> 0:08:58.439
<v Speaker 1>Swain copied the whole thing and pasted it and that

0:08:58.480 --> 0:09:01.640
<v Speaker 1>stuff was not redacted in because it didn't coffee paste

0:09:01.760 --> 0:09:06.880
<v Speaker 1>the black box. So there's there's definitely the wrong way

0:09:06.880 --> 0:09:09.480
<v Speaker 1>to do it, and it does happen from people who

0:09:09.520 --> 0:09:13.000
<v Speaker 1>just aren't thinking or just don't have enough experience, But

0:09:13.400 --> 0:09:16.360
<v Speaker 1>it seems like it would be a really big big deal,

0:09:16.480 --> 0:09:18.720
<v Speaker 1>Like you'd be like, Okay, your job for the rest

0:09:18.720 --> 0:09:22.520
<v Speaker 1>of your career is redacting, and you get perfect at redacting,

0:09:22.800 --> 0:09:25.400
<v Speaker 1>and that's what you do. Not welcome to the firm,

0:09:25.760 --> 0:09:27.640
<v Speaker 1>start redacting stuff. Good luck?

0:09:27.720 --> 0:09:31.480
<v Speaker 2>You know, yeah, for sure you can. You know, if

0:09:31.520 --> 0:09:34.720
<v Speaker 2>you're in a case and you see some things redacted,

0:09:34.760 --> 0:09:37.040
<v Speaker 2>but you're trying to still kind of figure it out

0:09:37.200 --> 0:09:40.280
<v Speaker 2>and like guess and speculate. First of all, that attorney's

0:09:40.440 --> 0:09:43.400
<v Speaker 2>you'd said, it's really not smart to do that, because

0:09:43.400 --> 0:09:45.719
<v Speaker 2>you can be off base and get things wrong, and

0:09:45.840 --> 0:09:49.079
<v Speaker 2>I've even done that in cases. But like, I was

0:09:49.120 --> 0:09:50.840
<v Speaker 2>trying to figure out how this could happen, and one

0:09:50.880 --> 0:09:53.280
<v Speaker 2>thing that I just sort of dreamed up was, you know,

0:09:53.320 --> 0:09:55.680
<v Speaker 2>let's say it's a case where you might know it's

0:09:55.679 --> 0:09:59.000
<v Speaker 2>one of like four three people that did something, and

0:09:59.240 --> 0:10:03.560
<v Speaker 2>one of them's name as Abraham Abramowitz. One of them's

0:10:03.640 --> 0:10:09.480
<v Speaker 2>name is is Joshua Clarkin Clarkin Gauge.

0:10:10.840 --> 0:10:12.559
<v Speaker 1>I was gonna say, don't drag me into it, but

0:10:12.720 --> 0:10:14.560
<v Speaker 1>I don't know this. Joshua Clark engaged.

0:10:15.080 --> 0:10:19.160
<v Speaker 2>And then one guy's name is Tom Bill. And you

0:10:19.280 --> 0:10:23.199
<v Speaker 2>see this very short reaction. You could probably figure, oh,

0:10:23.320 --> 0:10:24.760
<v Speaker 2>I bet you anything, it's the guy with a really

0:10:24.800 --> 0:10:27.800
<v Speaker 2>short name because it's a short reaction. So we've narrowed

0:10:27.800 --> 0:10:30.000
<v Speaker 2>it down that way. So that's just one way that

0:10:30.120 --> 0:10:33.760
<v Speaker 2>I dreamed up that you can you can smart redact,

0:10:33.840 --> 0:10:35.719
<v Speaker 2>you know, maybe do like longer lines if it's a

0:10:35.760 --> 0:10:37.760
<v Speaker 2>really short name or something that you're trying to conceal.

0:10:37.880 --> 0:10:41.480
<v Speaker 1>Good good point. I prescribe you to spend more time

0:10:41.600 --> 0:10:45.880
<v Speaker 1>looking at names on headstones and cemeteries. Because that's apparently

0:10:45.920 --> 0:10:49.240
<v Speaker 1>where writers, good writers get their best ideas for names

0:10:49.280 --> 0:10:52.640
<v Speaker 1>that aren't like Josh Clarkin Gage or something like that,

0:10:52.960 --> 0:10:57.400
<v Speaker 1>or Chance Finkelstein or something you know, like and sorry

0:10:57.400 --> 0:11:00.920
<v Speaker 1>it all Finkelstein's out there, but that's sounds made up

0:11:01.000 --> 0:11:03.400
<v Speaker 1>as a name. And if you are a Chance Finkelstein,

0:11:03.640 --> 0:11:05.920
<v Speaker 1>right in, because that would be amazing to hear from you.

0:11:06.559 --> 0:11:08.400
<v Speaker 2>Well, that's why I did silly things, because I didn't

0:11:08.400 --> 0:11:09.920
<v Speaker 2>want to accidentally say someone's real name.

0:11:10.200 --> 0:11:12.520
<v Speaker 1>Oh okay, oh I get it. What good idea?

0:11:12.960 --> 0:11:14.880
<v Speaker 2>I don't think Josh and Eric Clark Engage is a

0:11:14.920 --> 0:11:16.760
<v Speaker 2>real surname, is it.

0:11:17.360 --> 0:11:22.720
<v Speaker 1>I don't know, Probably not. It doesn't sound right. Maybe

0:11:22.840 --> 0:11:23.920
<v Speaker 1>Mick Clark Engage.

0:11:25.880 --> 0:11:28.920
<v Speaker 2>Back to redacting earlier, he said, like, what could happen

0:11:29.000 --> 0:11:30.360
<v Speaker 2>if you're like, I guess I don't have to pay

0:11:30.400 --> 0:11:33.319
<v Speaker 2>my lawyer. If they've screwed up on that level, maybe

0:11:33.480 --> 0:11:36.640
<v Speaker 2>that could happen. There could be legal penalties. There could

0:11:36.679 --> 0:11:39.680
<v Speaker 2>be like if you had to pay some big fine

0:11:39.720 --> 0:11:42.760
<v Speaker 2>in your attorney screwed up and you had to pay

0:11:42.800 --> 0:11:45.600
<v Speaker 2>that fine because of that bad reaction, then you could

0:11:45.640 --> 0:11:48.720
<v Speaker 2>certainly go after them. There would certainly be a loss

0:11:48.720 --> 0:11:51.079
<v Speaker 2>of trust. Which is another one of the things and

0:11:51.240 --> 0:11:53.600
<v Speaker 2>damage to reputation, Like, if that kind of thing gets out,

0:11:54.160 --> 0:11:55.840
<v Speaker 2>then you're not going to be someone that gets all

0:11:55.880 --> 0:11:58.320
<v Speaker 2>out of work. You're gonna be the bad redactor.

0:11:58.200 --> 0:12:00.839
<v Speaker 1>Right, So I think I think the moral of this

0:12:01.000 --> 0:12:03.839
<v Speaker 1>story is if your job is to redact things, do

0:12:04.000 --> 0:12:09.680
<v Speaker 1>it right. Yeah, Well, chuck silence means short stuff is out.

0:12:13.240 --> 0:12:16.120
<v Speaker 2>Stuff you Should Know is a production of iHeartRadio. For

0:12:16.240 --> 0:12:20.359
<v Speaker 2>more podcasts my heart Radio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,

0:12:20.520 --> 0:12:22.320
<v Speaker 2>or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.