Thought Leadership: Sponsorship, Celebrity and Influence in Canada

1
00:00:23,377 --> 00:00:27,000
Hi, I'm Nola Simon, and I'm the host
of the Hope and BossAbilities podcast.

2
00:00:27,607 --> 00:00:30,758
And I'd like to revisit a topic
I've mentioned before, which

3
00:00:30,758 --> 00:00:32,393
is about thought leadership.

4
00:00:33,572 --> 00:00:37,297
I actually, One of my guests
actually launched her podcast about

5
00:00:37,315 --> 00:00:38,905
thought leadership in Keswick.

6
00:00:38,905 --> 00:00:42,859
So unexpectedly, Keswick is
actually a hotbed when it comes

7
00:00:42,859 --> 00:00:44,318
to thought leadership in Canada.

8
00:00:45,852 --> 00:00:51,140
So I am on record as being self-funded.

9
00:00:51,165 --> 00:00:55,897
I don't accept sponsorship for
the podcast, and quite honestly,

10
00:00:55,897 --> 00:00:57,494
it's always been because

11
00:01:00,517 --> 00:01:08,035
I'm concerned about how money, power,
and influence are supporting views

12
00:01:08,037 --> 00:01:13,193
and influencing people in ways that I
might not intend and might not fully

13
00:01:13,193 --> 00:01:15,668
understand at the time that it happens.

14
00:01:15,674 --> 00:01:19,329
So I'll give you an example of
that from a wider perspective.

15
00:01:19,686 --> 00:01:25,115
Recently, OpenAI funded a, an influencer
trip, and they invited all these really

16
00:01:25,115 --> 00:01:31,741
top influencers who had huge followings
on TikTok and Instagram, and they hosted

17
00:01:31,741 --> 00:01:37,167
this at this farm, and the whole thing
went down like a lead balloon because when

18
00:01:37,167 --> 00:01:43,459
all of these influencers started talking
about AI, there was massive pushback on,

19
00:01:44,182 --> 00:01:49,944
how AI impacts the environment, the irony
of hosting it at a farm talking about,

20
00:01:50,141 --> 00:01:54,466
the, the honey and the bees that are at
the farm and really not talking about

21
00:01:54,482 --> 00:02:01,315
the environmental impact possibility or
likelihood related to AI and data centers.

22
00:02:02,294 --> 00:02:07,318
And there was a massive amount of
global pushback, mostly against the

23
00:02:07,318 --> 00:02:11,673
individual creators, which really the
source of the issue is actually the

24
00:02:11,678 --> 00:02:14,378
company, not the individual creators.

25
00:02:14,778 --> 00:02:19,567
But individual creators
are an easier target.

26
00:02:20,789 --> 00:02:25,087
And one woman in particular, actually,
I didn't necessarily agree how she

27
00:02:25,089 --> 00:02:28,695
handled it, but she did have a really
good point, which was the majority

28
00:02:28,695 --> 00:02:33,171
of people who got the, the pushback
were women, in- especially her.

29
00:02:33,679 --> 00:02:40,436
And it's fascinating to watch the
language around how the money, the

30
00:02:40,436 --> 00:02:49,402
power, and the influence surrounds
AI and how that changes perceptions.

31
00:02:50,606 --> 00:02:54,826
And so personally, I would never accept
any kind of deal with any kind of AI,

32
00:02:55,284 --> 00:03:00,505
but particularly American AI companies
because I don't exactly know what their

33
00:03:00,505 --> 00:03:04,316
relationships are with the government,
and the administration hasn't necessarily

34
00:03:04,317 --> 00:03:08,465
demonstrated that the way it's behaving
is in the best interest of Canada.

35
00:03:08,481 --> 00:03:13,582
So for me, I have concerns about
accepting any kind of sponsorship

36
00:03:13,593 --> 00:03:21,020
that's related to American companies
or technologies that I don't fully yet

37
00:03:21,021 --> 00:03:23,807
understand the long-term impact of.

38
00:03:25,205 --> 00:03:33,685
My policy on sponsorship really directly
influences my thought leadership because

39
00:03:33,721 --> 00:03:41,457
I don't want to be restricted and tied
to what I'm allowed to say, what I'm

40
00:03:41,457 --> 00:03:45,919
allowed to investigate, what questions
I'm allowed to ask, and that really

41
00:03:45,921 --> 00:03:48,162
c- brings us back to academia, right?

42
00:03:48,813 --> 00:03:53,685
Academics, when they write, they
are associated with a university,

43
00:03:53,736 --> 00:03:59,381
and so there is a hierarchy and a
political influence that exists.

44
00:04:00,400 --> 00:04:03,835
Yes, you're writing books, you're
publishing it under your own name,

45
00:04:04,058 --> 00:04:09,103
but if you are working for an
institution and that institution is

46
00:04:09,103 --> 00:04:12,242
associated with your name, there is

47
00:04:14,637 --> 00:04:17,096
power and influence that
goes along with that.

48
00:04:18,445 --> 00:04:22,155
And so I find it very interesting
the way that academics are actually

49
00:04:22,648 --> 00:04:30,669
navigating their institutional ties
and also the creator aspects of it.

50
00:04:30,681 --> 00:04:34,097
An example that I was talking to
somebody about today is Adam Grant.

51
00:04:34,424 --> 00:04:39,773
He works for Wharton, but in his most
recent book, he-- it's called Vibe.

52
00:04:39,776 --> 00:04:41,225
It's coming out sometime soon.

53
00:04:41,228 --> 00:04:43,292
I don't know what it, what is coming out.

54
00:04:43,304 --> 00:04:51,152
But he did this with his last book
where he hired or made a deal with

55
00:04:51,187 --> 00:04:54,430
celebrities like Jennifer Garner
to really come and talk to him, and

56
00:04:54,430 --> 00:04:55,922
they would publish it as a podcast.

57
00:04:55,955 --> 00:05:00,798
But she also attended events
and helped him sell that book.

58
00:05:02,311 --> 00:05:03,489
I don't know if she was paid.

59
00:05:03,836 --> 00:05:05,240
You would assume that she would be.

60
00:05:05,247 --> 00:05:09,001
She would negotiate that sh- there's a
cost to her fees because she is a working

61
00:05:09,001 --> 00:05:13,507
mom, and, she deserves to be paid just
as much as Adam Grant gets to be paid

62
00:05:13,509 --> 00:05:17,233
for his book and, the, the academic
work that he does for his university.

63
00:05:18,183 --> 00:05:19,461
But that's never disclosed.

64
00:05:20,141 --> 00:05:21,191
That's never disclosed.

65
00:05:21,724 --> 00:05:25,429
So the interesting thing about
Adam is on social media, he

66
00:05:27,537 --> 00:05:31,095
publishes a lot, but very
rarely ever responds.

67
00:05:31,102 --> 00:05:33,791
So I think I've been following
his work for about eight years

68
00:05:33,799 --> 00:05:36,131
now, and a lot of it I like.

69
00:05:36,376 --> 00:05:41,096
Honestly I've learned a lot from
watching how he operates, and

70
00:05:41,121 --> 00:05:42,425
I'll give him his credits there.

71
00:05:42,900 --> 00:05:47,043
But what I've noticed is over the years
is he broadcasts, he doesn't respond.

72
00:05:47,282 --> 00:05:52,231
And so it's interesting that,
he started a community with

73
00:05:52,236 --> 00:05:54,926
Threads and Instagram, I think.

74
00:05:55,502 --> 00:05:58,223
But as I said to somebody,
how do you have a community?

75
00:05:58,234 --> 00:06:02,277
How do you call it a community
if you're the only one talking?

76
00:06:03,279 --> 00:06:07,322
And presumably members can talk to
each other, but it's not like he's

77
00:06:07,325 --> 00:06:10,917
facilitating conversation where
he's individually hearing people.

78
00:06:12,266 --> 00:06:14,643
And I can tell you for a fact
I've tried for eight years to

79
00:06:14,643 --> 00:06:16,062
have conversations with him.

80
00:06:16,520 --> 00:06:20,785
I've tried to really reach out and ask
him to reconsider things because, there

81
00:06:20,789 --> 00:06:24,128
was particular topics that I thought his

82
00:06:26,866 --> 00:06:30,158
short style really lost the nuance on.

83
00:06:30,812 --> 00:06:32,099
And I tried to email him.

84
00:06:32,099 --> 00:06:35,949
I tried to DM him on social media
and I couldn't get anywhere in terms

85
00:06:35,951 --> 00:06:37,413
of having that discussion with him.

86
00:06:38,825 --> 00:06:44,428
So it was interesting this week because
in the summer I had commented on one

87
00:06:44,429 --> 00:06:47,505
of his posts about whether his book
tour was actually gonna come to Canada,

88
00:06:48,162 --> 00:06:53,098
and this week I commented and I said,
"He still hasn't responded. I guess

89
00:06:53,100 --> 00:06:57,795
he just doesn't vibe with Canada."
And he actually responded and said he

90
00:06:57,796 --> 00:07:00,715
loves Canada, but couldn't fit it in
this tour, hopes to come next year.

91
00:07:01,160 --> 00:07:01,891
So we thanked him.

92
00:07:02,776 --> 00:07:03,194
But

93
00:07:06,831 --> 00:07:11,087
It shouldn't take eight years
to have some kind of productive

94
00:07:11,115 --> 00:07:15,619
conversation with somebody who actually
values what other people think.

95
00:07:16,243 --> 00:07:20,505
So that's where it's when it comes to
thought leadership, my personal view is,

96
00:07:21,135 --> 00:07:26,080
obviously there's a parasocial aspect
of what it's like to actually operate on

97
00:07:26,081 --> 00:07:28,004
social media, but also to publish a book.

98
00:07:28,005 --> 00:07:29,969
You publish a book, you don't
know who's reading that.

99
00:07:29,999 --> 00:07:31,142
They get it from the library.

100
00:07:31,143 --> 00:07:33,953
You have no insight
into who that person is.

101
00:07:34,582 --> 00:07:38,073
So you're writing it with the
idea of a reader in mind, but you

102
00:07:38,073 --> 00:07:39,190
don't actually know who that is.

103
00:07:39,193 --> 00:07:44,558
That reader knows a lot more about you
than you ever know about them, and so

104
00:07:44,578 --> 00:07:46,741
that's been the deal from the beginning.

105
00:07:48,460 --> 00:07:53,666
Where social media changed it is people
were able to speak up and have comment

106
00:07:53,666 --> 00:07:56,997
and have conversations in ways that

107
00:08:00,440 --> 00:08:04,748
Previously academics didn't open
them up, up- themselves up to.

108
00:08:05,759 --> 00:08:13,959
And it's almost a version of fame
that is happening right now where

109
00:08:14,676 --> 00:08:21,613
because he's courting celebrity and
movie stars, and he's had a whole

110
00:08:21,614 --> 00:08:27,959
bunch of famous people on his podcast,
how does that change the audience?

111
00:08:27,980 --> 00:08:34,451
How does that change your perception
of his academic reputation?

112
00:08:35,453 --> 00:08:45,705
And does that impact the quality of
his research and how that's conveyed?

113
00:08:46,498 --> 00:08:54,708
Because he's courting popularity,
so is he… What is he sacrificing

114
00:08:56,194 --> 00:09:01,016
in the name of acceptance?

115
00:09:01,421 --> 00:09:04,724
And essentially what he's doing is
he's trying to leverage the audience

116
00:09:04,799 --> 00:09:11,179
of the celebrity, and the celebrity
is trying to leverage his audience

117
00:09:11,180 --> 00:09:14,119
to broaden their network as well too.

118
00:09:14,132 --> 00:09:19,187
So again, everybody's getting a
trade-off in terms of like money, in

119
00:09:19,188 --> 00:09:24,515
terms of influence, in terms of power,
and that comes at a price and a cost

120
00:09:24,517 --> 00:09:29,441
with visibility and that parasocial
relationship with an audience, right?

121
00:09:30,660 --> 00:09:34,764
When it comes to me
personally as a podcaster-

122
00:09:37,120 --> 00:09:40,537
I actually don't know who
listens to the podcast.

123
00:09:40,554 --> 00:09:44,355
Most of the time when I've received a
review on my podcast, it's somebody who's

124
00:09:44,356 --> 00:09:48,674
been a guest on my podcast, somebody who
I know, who I used to work with, who I've

125
00:09:48,679 --> 00:09:50,772
had ongoing conversations with online.

126
00:09:51,242 --> 00:09:56,264
I very rarely have received any kind
of feedback from a general listener.

127
00:09:56,591 --> 00:10:00,404
It's like pulling teeth to get input from
somebody who's listened to the podcast.

128
00:10:01,010 --> 00:10:02,007
And that's okay.

129
00:10:02,153 --> 00:10:07,262
It's just you have to decide
how that proceeds, right?

130
00:10:07,262 --> 00:10:09,274
Do you stop asking for reviews?

131
00:10:09,277 --> 00:10:12,261
Do you… I always wanna get
questions because I don't

132
00:10:12,262 --> 00:10:13,784
know what people are thinking.

133
00:10:14,378 --> 00:10:18,034
If my thinking is resonating,
what lands, what doesn't land.

134
00:10:18,114 --> 00:10:25,702
It's like designing in the dark
and talking to a void because

135
00:10:25,712 --> 00:10:28,630
you don't have that interaction

136
00:10:32,875 --> 00:10:36,645
This is where I'm really curious
about how thought leadership is

137
00:10:36,645 --> 00:10:43,958
actually going to develop in the age
of AI because, like when I publish

138
00:10:43,959 --> 00:10:47,573
a podcast, I'm publishing the audio,
but I'm also publishing transcripts.

139
00:10:47,576 --> 00:10:51,947
The transcripts then get, get
scraped by AI, which means that

140
00:10:52,731 --> 00:10:58,010
this is feeding and training AI.

141
00:10:59,367 --> 00:11:03,675
Now, am I gonna stop because
I don't wanna train AI?

142
00:11:04,474 --> 00:11:05,387
Maybe one time.

143
00:11:05,540 --> 00:11:07,436
I don't know how it's
really gonna shake out.

144
00:11:07,942 --> 00:11:09,021
I don't really know

145
00:11:11,785 --> 00:11:12,868
How do you control that?

146
00:11:13,664 --> 00:11:15,558
I don't know that you can control that.

147
00:11:15,572 --> 00:11:21,140
So the only thing that you can do is
really put out the best quality thought

148
00:11:22,258 --> 00:11:27,794
that you can and hope that the people who
are actually interacting with it at the

149
00:11:27,794 --> 00:11:33,737
end of the line the actual people, not the
bots that are interpreting it, recognize

150
00:11:33,739 --> 00:11:40,221
the quality human thought behind it and,
attribute that a- appropriately, and

151
00:11:40,221 --> 00:11:44,555
it helps eventually build relationships
and introduce me to networks I wouldn't

152
00:11:44,560 --> 00:11:47,272
necessarily have access to otherwise.

153
00:11:48,687 --> 00:11:50,591
That's the best case
scenario I can think of.

154
00:11:50,593 --> 00:11:53,661
I can think of probably all kinds of
other negatives, but I don't wanna

155
00:11:53,661 --> 00:11:59,473
spend a lot of time on the negatives
because I can't control that.

156
00:11:59,515 --> 00:12:03,468
The only thing I can control is what
I can influence myself and the actions

157
00:12:03,471 --> 00:12:10,033
that I take personally, and that really
comes down to the day-to-day of what I

158
00:12:10,128 --> 00:12:15,620
give my attention to, what I allow to
influence me, and then how I synthesize

159
00:12:15,624 --> 00:12:22,078
that and how I make my thoughts public,
whether that's writing, whether that's

160
00:12:22,080 --> 00:12:27,621
doing the podcast, whether that's,
bringing it into a consulting engagement

161
00:12:27,621 --> 00:12:31,896
with a client who wants to understand
how will this influence the future.

162
00:12:31,898 --> 00:12:37,410
And this is where thought leadership
is about influencing the future.

163
00:12:37,416 --> 00:12:39,960
You're building out a body
of work, of course, and that

164
00:12:39,962 --> 00:12:41,760
does actually build legacy.

165
00:12:42,207 --> 00:12:46,451
But what you're really trying
to do is influence the future

166
00:12:49,303 --> 00:12:55,556
Because whoever listens to you, however
reads you, they can take that idea that

167
00:12:55,556 --> 00:13:01,366
you've expressed and then make decisions
from that, and it builds out how either

168
00:13:01,472 --> 00:13:05,319
they're going to behave, how they
expect the employees in their company

169
00:13:05,319 --> 00:13:11,854
to behave and how that then in turn
allows them to function as a business,

170
00:13:11,871 --> 00:13:14,678
and what social norms that influences.

171
00:13:15,032 --> 00:13:18,113
All of this is in the name of the future.

172
00:13:19,214 --> 00:13:21,863
And this is really what the
changes that I'm seeing in thought

173
00:13:21,876 --> 00:13:23,931
leadership are really interesting.

174
00:13:24,443 --> 00:13:27,979
That celebrity aspect and bringing
in celebrities, so celebrities are

175
00:13:27,980 --> 00:13:31,544
now dominating podcasts, and you
don't actually have journalists

176
00:13:31,578 --> 00:13:37,504
interviewing stars about their movies,
about authors about their books.

177
00:13:37,940 --> 00:13:43,140
You have celebrities, so actors
and actresses and people who

178
00:13:43,198 --> 00:13:46,788
aren't trained professional
interviewers asking the questions.

179
00:13:47,593 --> 00:13:49,207
How does that really

180
00:13:51,541 --> 00:13:52,086
Advance

181
00:13:55,548 --> 00:13:59,922
the ideas and the concepts and the
themes when the person interviewing

182
00:14:03,085 --> 00:14:05,916
Is Softball.

183
00:14:07,031 --> 00:14:13,328
They're not asking really
hard questions like a trained

184
00:14:13,360 --> 00:14:14,858
professional journalist would.

185
00:14:16,208 --> 00:14:17,677
So I was actually proud this week.

186
00:14:17,677 --> 00:14:21,635
I discovered… I didn't even know this
chart existed, but there's a Goodpods

187
00:14:21,657 --> 00:14:26,362
chart for investigative journalism,
and I apparently rank on that chart.

188
00:14:26,705 --> 00:14:28,100
Again, charts aren't the point.

189
00:14:28,479 --> 00:14:34,624
The point is the questions that I
ask are at the level being recognized

190
00:14:34,626 --> 00:14:36,215
as investigative journalism.

191
00:14:36,444 --> 00:14:37,971
That's important to me.

192
00:14:38,831 --> 00:14:40,795
Now, do I think this
chart influences much?

193
00:14:40,829 --> 00:14:41,180
No.

194
00:14:41,618 --> 00:14:45,516
But the fact that even the algorithm,
because it is likely an algorithm that's

195
00:14:45,520 --> 00:14:50,243
picking that up is associating me with
investigative journalism, and there was

196
00:14:50,245 --> 00:14:54,613
another chart that actually put me on
the writing chart that's interesting

197
00:14:54,614 --> 00:15:03,261
to me because that's a mirror of how
I'm showing up and being perceived.

198
00:15:04,388 --> 00:15:06,769
So I'm always on leadership charts.

199
00:15:06,771 --> 00:15:08,260
I'm always on careers charts.

200
00:15:08,260 --> 00:15:09,886
I'm always on management charts.

201
00:15:10,412 --> 00:15:13,859
And again, the individual charts
don't really matter, but it's

202
00:15:13,876 --> 00:15:18,309
more about where does my work
fit, especially as a futurist.

203
00:15:18,698 --> 00:15:25,490
Futurism is, like, all aspects of work
and life, so what box do you put that in?

204
00:15:25,857 --> 00:15:29,923
It's a really challenging one to answer
because, you're not a set industry.

205
00:15:29,935 --> 00:15:33,518
You're not a set preconceived box.

206
00:15:34,615 --> 00:15:36,457
You could be anywhere, right?

207
00:15:36,480 --> 00:15:41,800
And so that's where charts are
actually useful to me because it

208
00:15:41,878 --> 00:15:45,774
lets me know how the work is actually
being perceived and interpreted,

209
00:15:46,609 --> 00:15:49,092
even at an algorithmic level, right?

210
00:15:49,680 --> 00:15:56,408
And that, again, is important for knowing
the influence that it possibly has, right?

211
00:15:56,857 --> 00:16:02,442
And again, it comes down to who
likely is listening and how they're

212
00:16:02,442 --> 00:16:09,094
using the information presented,
and what changes with that, right?

213
00:16:09,813 --> 00:16:12,084
As a side I'm a big fan of George Michael.

214
00:16:12,100 --> 00:16:13,987
Now, I love George Michael.

215
00:16:14,003 --> 00:16:15,728
He is unfortunately dead.

216
00:16:15,729 --> 00:16:16,901
He's been dead for 10 years.

217
00:16:17,292 --> 00:16:23,315
One of the useful facts about
that unfortunate fact is that

218
00:16:25,324 --> 00:16:26,691
I know his story.

219
00:16:26,728 --> 00:16:28,301
I know what his values were.

220
00:16:28,303 --> 00:16:29,723
I know what he stood for.

221
00:16:30,158 --> 00:16:31,650
It's not a moving target.

222
00:16:31,671 --> 00:16:35,461
It's not like he wakes up one
day and changes his mind about,

223
00:16:38,342 --> 00:16:40,643
what his pol-politics are.

224
00:16:41,680 --> 00:16:47,910
That's done because unfortunately
he's deceased, and I miss him

225
00:16:47,911 --> 00:16:54,280
intensely, but I know who he was,
and that's not going to change.

226
00:16:54,283 --> 00:17:00,194
He's not going- Need to evolve
because his arc is done.

227
00:17:01,053 --> 00:17:04,239
Now, I don't know everything
obviously about George Michael's life.

228
00:17:04,241 --> 00:17:09,850
He had a whole section of private
life that isn't necessarily public.

229
00:17:10,066 --> 00:17:18,607
But what is public, I am comfortable with
what he stood for, and that's why I don't

230
00:17:18,607 --> 00:17:28,292
actually introduce other pop culture icons
because George Michael is safe to me.

231
00:17:28,292 --> 00:17:29,506
I know what he stands for.

232
00:17:29,788 --> 00:17:32,833
So I- that's a version
of thought leadership.

233
00:17:33,132 --> 00:17:36,361
I find this thing with Jennifer
Garner that Adam Grant has

234
00:17:36,373 --> 00:17:37,806
very interesting as well too.

235
00:17:37,860 --> 00:17:42,295
It's like a fan girl experience
that they're sharing with the world.

236
00:17:42,307 --> 00:17:44,579
She's a fan of him, he's a fan of hers.

237
00:17:45,099 --> 00:17:49,360
But it's an ongoing evolving
relationship, and how does that change

238
00:17:49,831 --> 00:17:52,817
as politics change, as values change?

239
00:17:53,350 --> 00:17:56,675
Is it going to be a constant
deepening relationship?

240
00:17:57,263 --> 00:18:01,059
Which possibly it totally can be,
and it could become its own viable

241
00:18:01,071 --> 00:18:03,304
thing, and that's a beautiful thing.

242
00:18:03,771 --> 00:18:06,604
It's the type of thing that makes
me anxious because you're tying

243
00:18:06,605 --> 00:18:11,834
your personal brands into something
you don't fully understand.

244
00:18:11,835 --> 00:18:15,154
But I see Adam also doing that
with Brene Brown as well too.

245
00:18:15,349 --> 00:18:17,601
Now, all of these people are American.

246
00:18:18,040 --> 00:18:22,065
I don't see this sort of thing
happening on Canadian podcasts

247
00:18:24,975 --> 00:18:27,291
Is it a culture divide?

248
00:18:27,691 --> 00:18:31,648
These are all questions that I have,
and this is what I'm on an ongoing

249
00:18:31,649 --> 00:18:34,336
journey to, to look at and understand.

250
00:18:34,827 --> 00:18:39,060
And how does that tie into the world of
work and how we work and how we live?

251
00:18:39,570 --> 00:18:45,815
All of it is based in values, in trust,
and identity, in who we all really are

252
00:18:46,074 --> 00:18:55,725
and who we allow to influence how we make
decisions, how our judgment is reflected

253
00:19:00,181 --> 00:19:01,715
And really what we stand for.

254
00:19:02,675 --> 00:19:05,458
What you consume is who you are, right?

255
00:19:05,494 --> 00:19:07,824
And that includes thought leadership.

256
00:19:08,833 --> 00:19:12,272
Anyways, I am always as
interested in your thoughts.

257
00:19:12,333 --> 00:19:15,422
I'll never stop asking.

258
00:19:15,859 --> 00:19:19,553
I might fall off my chair in shock
if anybody actually responds.

259
00:19:20,425 --> 00:19:23,647
But I always will try to encourage it.

260
00:19:23,766 --> 00:19:27,038
And I am experimenting with
how this impacts on charts.

261
00:19:27,333 --> 00:19:30,951
So if there is one action, if you
don't feel comfortable doing a

262
00:19:30,951 --> 00:19:34,315
review or sending a question or
anything like that, just subscribe.

263
00:19:34,525 --> 00:19:37,931
Whatever player you are on, just
subscribe, 'cause apparently

264
00:19:37,932 --> 00:19:40,192
that can drive charts as well.

265
00:19:40,657 --> 00:19:45,466
And, if you share it, if you save it,
if you download it, also subscribe.

266
00:19:46,455 --> 00:19:47,956
All of that would be appreciated.

267
00:19:48,160 --> 00:19:48,963
Thank you so much.

268
00:19:49,295 --> 00:19:50,065
Hope it's helpful.