Below the Radar Transcript
Episode 125: Restorying the Climate Crisis — with Grace nosek
Speakers: Alyha Bardi, Am Johal, Grace Nosek
[theme music]
Alyha Bardi 0:02
Hello listeners! I’m Alyha with Below the Radar, a knowledge democracy podcast. Below the Radar is recorded on the territories of the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh peoples. On this episode of Below the Radar, our host Am Johal is joined by lawyer, climate storyteller, and founder of the UBC Climate Hub, Grace Nosek — who takes us on a mission to publicly uncover feelings of ‘climate doom’ and ‘individual responsibility’ as narratives dispelled by the fossil fuel industry. She also speaks to overcoming eco-anxieties, the importance of making a small day-to-day difference that can ‘ripple outward,’ and her belief in Pleasure Activism. I hope you enjoy the episode!
[theme music fades]
Am Johal 0:48
Hi everyone, welcome to Below the Radar — delighted that you could join us again. Today we're with Grace Nosek. Welcome, Grace.
Grace Nosek 0:57
Thanks so much Am —really excited to be here.
Am Johal 1:00
Yeah, I wonder if we could begin, maybe if you could introduce yourself a little bit?
Grace Nosek 1:06
I would love to. First, I'd like to just mention that I'm speaking to you today, from the traditional ancestral unseeded territories of the Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh First Nations. And that that was kind of the first thing I realized about moving here. I volunteered with the UVic Indigenous Law Research Unit, and got so excited about how the resurgence of Indigenous law, across what we call Canada — is kind of offering up these different systems. So I always love to think about that in terms of these conversations, and what that might have to offer. And yeah, I think of myself mostly as a climate storyteller. I have a law degree, I guess I'm technically a barred attorney in the US. And I've done a bunch of different things. But I always come back to empowering people to take care of where they live, and to breathe clean air and have clean water. And yeah, so this kind of melding of environmental and climate justice, and story.
Am Johal 2:18
You're involved with the UBC Climate Hub, I’m wondering if we can begin there about what your role is, and the kind of work that you do?
Grace Nosek 2:28
Sure, yeah. So the Climate Hub, which is one of the most joyful things I've ever been a part of - is this really interesting, hybrid entity, where it's student-led, but university-supported. So there are actually two full-time staff and then a bunch of student staff and grad student researchers, supporting students who have this vision for what a climate-just university and community looks like. And it's this incredible way to take the passion and the insight of young folks who really know the transformation that we need, and leverage all of the resources that a university has. So I'm really excited about the model. And it also — to me is kind of a moral necessity. We know young folks are really feeling this strain this fear for their future. And the best thing over and over again, that social science does for that is empowering them, making them feel like they have agency, and they can take action. And so what better way than giving them a seat at the table. So yeah, I'm the founder of the Climate Hub with some other amazing co-founders. And we started it three years ago now.
Am Johal 3:42
Amazing. And now I know that you're a lawyer, as you mentioned, but you're also doing a PhD. I’m wondering if you can talk a little bit about your research interests — what you're working on?
Grace Nosek 3:53
Sure, I am getting my PhD in law. And I'm studying how the fossil fuel industry has kind of manufactured uncertainty around climate science for the last several decades. And how they've used law to do that. And it's this really interesting phenomenon that's kind of like this invisible threat to democracy. But essentially, a ton of corporations are using the fact that science is inherently uncertain. You know, that's just a feature of scientific discovery and the process — and they are making it seem like it is much more uncertain than it is, to protect their profit. And we saw the tobacco industry do this for half a century, and hundreds of millions of people died because they really kept the knowledge of the connection between their product, and lung cancer, and many other health problems secret. And lots of other industries are doing that — they have a lot of incentive to kind of manipulate public understanding of these topics. And what happened though, is the fossil fuel industry, manipulated an entire country essentially into not only not believing that climate change was happening, real, human-caused — but now they have all these new narratives that they're sowing, and they have billions of dollars, and these massive communication teams to do that. So yeah, I study that.
Am Johal 5:30
Really, really light stuff really. [both laugh] I think James Hogan wrote a book covering a little bit of that background. And in many ways, I think you're exactly right in how you're presenting this in terms of — the science has been basically decided since the mid to late 70s. And how is it that companies in the oil industry have been so effective in shaping public policy, and laying the policy groundwork that sort of perpetuates it into the future? Clearly, there's economic issues at play, financial risk models, and financial investments that are under threat, as a result of what the science says. And obviously, there are public relations aspects brought to bear, to deploy in terms of tactics and strategies to sow that doubt. And in your research, what have you sort of uncovered in terms of what what was happening in the 70s and 80s is obviously different than what they're doing now — and I'm wondering if you can chart that, that story a little bit?
Grace Nosek 6:47
Yeah, it's such a great question. And I'm one of the big things I'm going to work on this year is just really bringing these original documents to people's attention from the late 70s. And the 1980s. Because I read these original documents from Exxon, from Mobil, when they were then two different companies from these other places. And it is crystal clear that they were at the forefront of climate science. And that climate change is not a particularly controversial scientific finding, it has kind of progressed in this incremental way, in the same way as many other things. But that you can see even in the early 1980s, that they're already getting really nervous about what this means for their future — if the public and the government start to understand how serious this threat is. But they also initially wanted to cooperate with the government and they had this moment to take a different path, they could have really chosen that to make a profit and do what they were doing — and to switch. They were the ones who understood the threat, the first and the earliest. And they also understood that by the time we knew it was bad, it would be too late to mitigate a lot of the harm. And they knew all of that. And so then it wasn't until like the late 1980s, early 1990s, that they really went hard on undermining the science. And so you'll see this really interesting thing where, in the early 1990s, the US actually believes in climate science, because corporations haven't dug in yet. And then in the decade after, that's when you really start seeing the effects of that campaign. The thing about my chapter that I'm writing now is — they have every avenue, they are the consummate storytellers. They are the consummate influencers, before influencers happen, which is why I think of storytelling as such a critical practice to what I study. Because they figure out that they have to fund PBS public broadcasting, they have a list of all the opinion leaders in the US, and all of these different places that they need to court, that they need to fund. They give money to all of the elite institutions — universities who are now, you know, I don't think they're doing it purposefully. But because they rely on that funding, they mimic the talking points of the fossil fuel industry. And they are so clever. They know they can't undermine the science anymore. So now what they're doing is a lot of the stories are, ‘it will destroy our economy if we take action on this. There's no hope, why engage, why even care? Why do all of these things that will cripple us in the present when we don't have any hope anyway?’ And they sow these stories in a way that's invisible to the public, so the public doesn't understand that they're coming from the fossil fuel industry. Because of course, if the public understood they were coming from the fossil fuel industry, they'd be like, 'okay, yeah, right. That's like the tobacco industry telling me to smoke.' And so it's this really powerful war of ideas that they've won, and most people don't even recognize how much they've shaped our public imagination.
Am Johal 10:05
Amazing. And so in the current context of how large companies are engaging with this narrative construction — how do you see it changed? Or what are the new narratives that they’re spinning?
Grace Nosek 10:20
Yeah, the new narrative. Yeah, I love that you're asking this because I think it's what's so critical, and I'm just wanting to write an op-ed on it. But for instance, we know that they're going after promoting natural gas like that they've hired influencers to say, 'my cooking is better when I cook with natural gas,' like small, that's a small strategy, but they're so micro-targeted. We know that a group — it's not clear exactly who's funding what, but that they're starting to do, quote-unquote, racial justice groups arguing that we need fossil fuels, that everything else is too expensive. But they can't figure out who is actually funding those, but it looks like it's a fossil fuel industry group. As I write in my first paper that just came out, they're funding a ton of the bills, cracking down on protests in the US. So those are ensnaring Black Lives Matter and other racial justice protests, but they're also really targeted to things like Standing Rock and Indigenous-led resistance to pipelines. And the fossil fuel industry is — I could tell you the whole story, but essentially they proposed a lot of these bills. They drew up the language, and then they gave them out to Republican legislators at the state level in the US and even the Trump administration. And the Alberta law looks very similar to what was asked in the US, like, I haven't seen an actual link, but this critical infrastructure language — and they're going after nonprofits, these interesting bills that say, 'if it's a nonprofit supporting a protester, we can hold them liable.' And so it's this massive web where they're making it impossible for the public to participate in the climate dialogue, and they're making the consequences so high for them if they do. The doom is one I find so far, I find it morally repugnant, because it makes children feel like they have no hope on this planet. And that is incredibly corrosive to your mental health. What they know though, from the social sciences is that if you don't feel hope, you disengage. They're going after personal responsibility, individual guilt, because again — and I mean, you can see BP popularized the individual carbon calculator and started getting schools to do that a decade ago. And so all of these universities and high schools that have these sustainability programs that largely focus on individual choice and recycling are, unfortunately, re-entrenching what the fossil fuel industry wants us to do. But what they also know — and my master's thesis is all about the cognitive hurdles to climate change. So I'm deeply entrenched in that, but they know that if you feel guilty about climate change, you will also disengage, and you will think it's less of a problem. Your mind rationalizes that because you don't want to feel bad about your choices. So you kind of push it away out of mind. So yeah, so we've got racial justice, individual choice. The universities are a huge one. They've funded hundreds of millions of dollars into every major research university. And so then the universities start talking about individual choice, 'and well, it's not their fault. It's all of our faults. I drive a car,' this hypocrisy narrative. But I'm like, that's ridiculous. They closed off all the other options for you. Like they made sure that there was no other policy. And at the same time, as they're sowing all of these narratives, they are actually then spending hundreds of millions of dollars to make sure that carbon taxes lose at the state level in the US, and in all of these other places. But there's a leaked document in Canada. That's so interesting. I think it's from 2018. And it's like a PR firm hired by a fossil fuel industry coalition. And essentially one of their talking points is there's no hope on climate change. Like 'why should we?' That's the narrative that they spread that like we shouldn't be taking action at the federal government because there's no hope.
Am Johal 14:45
It's interesting, this sort of targeted sort of approach that's really meant to demobilize, immobilize, depoliticize people — this other seed of doubt that has to do with 'oh, it's so complicated.’ It's really hard to situate oneself in relation to this incredibly complex problem. Or that this question of it's a set of individual ethical choices, and any kind of collective response at the level of policy — can't be even thought of. Or in the political economy — I grew up in rural BC in Williams Lake and at the time, the environmental movement and forestry were at loggerheads, literally. And there were these sort of industry-led campaigns that would — people would put up in front of their house 'forestry feeds my family.' And it's not like people were literally eating wood chips or something. But it was this idea that the forestry funded families and mortgages and all this, and environmentalists were these people who came from urban centers and this type of thing. And so I can see how industry-led campaigns can be effective because of the weight of money they bring to the table. But there's also, as you mentioned, there are these kind of astroturf groups funded by industry that are meant to be kind of a civil society. The companies don't necessarily write the legislation themselves, but they do it through these groups. And are just slightly arm's length, but not really, if you follow the money. And in The States, what are some of the bigger organizations that are doing this kind of policy-level work, to get in the hands of legislators? Sort of precooked policy in a way.
Grace Nosek 16:33
Yeah, great question. And I just want to tack on, because I think what you're saying is so critical. When people get mad at folks who work in the fossil fuel industry I am like, ‘no, no, no, no.’ That's not who I mad at. No, I'm mad at the lawyers, and the accountants. And it's truly this group of like, probably 100 people, almost all of them, men, almost all of them white, who have made these decisions at the highest levels in these groups. And then made sure that the rage is felt against everyone else. And so sometimes, when I'm organizing, I'm like, ‘I'm going to save my rage.’ There's lots to rage at, but I'm going to make sure that I don't forget about this kind of like cabal of people who really — these men who made these choices for billions of people and animals and have not been held accountable for that.
Am Johal 17:34
And also not to mention the mobilization of public resources to say, fund the oil war room that is taking place, set up in Alberta.
Grace Nosek 17:44
Yes, yes, yes, we can certainly put politicians in that sphere, but like, it's how I think of privilege. It's like, if you have options to be in different jobs and lots of things that you can do — I'm really disappointed because I'm a lawyer, and lawyers who defend Transmountain and these other groups in ways that they know are problematic. And yeah, so that's kind of who I hold my ire for — and they come up with these campaigns that like, they don't have to do it this way. It's not the only way to make money. They have just chosen a path that destroys the most amount. And they're gonna suffer from it economically too, we're seeing that. But it's this wild choice. Two of the big groups are the American Petroleum Institute, API. And that's the biggest oil and trade group, the trade lobbying group for fossil fuels in the US, representing I think, more than 500. They are deeply tied to like the big carbon majors, particularly Exxon Mobil, Exxon often sits on their board. They worked very closely on a lot of these projects to manufacture uncertainty around science. And one of the documents that they produced — well, it was someone with API leading this group, of other fossil fuel industry folks and created a memo in 1998. It was like a roadmap to victory. And it parroted a lot of what other memos from like the tobacco industry had said, but essentially 'we will win when the public feels uncertain about climate science.' The more on that, the more you can make them feel confused, the less action that can happen. And that was right around Kyoto and right in this moment, where there was real momentum for climate action. We forget that really in the 90s — early 90s, it was not controversial. A lot of Republicans believed in climate change, then too. And this small group really worked hard to make climate change a partisan issue. And I think this will be quite interesting for your podcast audience. A lot of scholars think it's because this group of people called Free Market Fundamentalists essentially, who kind of came out of this cold war setting, and were really afraid of socialism and communism. And saw and see environmental issues and climate change in particular, as these massive market failures that require a lot of regulation if you're going to address them. And this group believes that free speech, and all these other things are tied to a free market, that you can't be free without a free market. And so they've traced why some of these people, some of these kind of eminent scientists in other realms, went out swinging so hard against climate science. And it was kind of this sense that they were so afraid that if we acknowledge the science of climate, it would take so much government action to address it. So I always think that's a really interesting piece for people to wrap their heads around. And where I think a lot of people are still coming from. And there's like a seed of truth in that, that they want freedom, which is not a bad thing, but they've been manipulated on what freedom is.
Am Johal 21:24
Yeah, this sounds a lot like a Century of The Self, Adam Curtis, where the conspiracy music comes on and Edward Bernays, the nephew of Freud is like, how to market cigarettes to women in the 20s. Right? It's bizarre the way communications and PR can be used to shift opinions — political parties do it all the time. But when it's on something as existential as climate change, there's a lot at stake. You had mentioned earlier, sort of these notions around ecological pessimism or ecological grief, or I've seen some people use the term ecological mourning. This idea of a world that's ending or in crisis. And, of course, we need to be on a more positive horizon to maintain and sustain our political organizing and other types of things. And so I'm wondering if you can speak to a little bit of how you approach the problem of ecological grief and pessimism in your work, and how you try to intervene in your own way?
Grace Nosek 22:38
I just will say that I am cognizant of the critique of like this eco-anxiety as being something that — it's kind of a very white privileged idea. Because it's the first time this group has maybe faced an existential threat, whereas many other folks and communities have been living with existential threat for many, many centuries. And I think that's really interesting and important to remember as I do the work. But I think for me, how I feel hope is that I live deeply in the moment. And I think it matters to just make someone's day better, one day. And I can see how those small things add up to massive change. When you're really feeling sad, or you're upset, it's painful, and having someone come and kind of change your mood, or inspire you, or make you feel better is relief. And so I don't know if I can change the full ship. Sometimes I think of us as like a ship trying to turn away from the iceberg — and I develop that metaphor in various other things. And I certainly will not be able to make it turn by myself. But I believe that my action matters, and that's what’s sustaining for me. That's really important for folks to stay in the movement and not get burned out, is to believe that they matter. And I think, I'm not sure why, but I'm sure there's some industry narratives going on here, but people don't feel like they matter. They don't feel like they're making a difference. And I think that's just a bigger problem of our system, regardless, like we should all feel like we matter, and are important, and our actions shift those around — both good and bad. I really focus on if I can help. I mentor a lot of folks — if I can make them feel good today, that's enough, that's big. And those things, I think, ripple outwards. But I can also see them, that's very tangible. I had a catastrophic injury when I was in university, and I was in unbelievable pain when that happened. And so I know how long a day can feel when you're in pain. And obviously, that's one privileged experience of that. But it makes me feel deeply about the present, and making sure no one is in pain now, and trusting that the future will be better if I focus on the present.
Am Johal 25:32
It's really super interesting to hear that vantage point. And I'm wondering — we were talking before we went on air on the role of humor in social movements, and how you think through that, or how you place it in the work that you do.
Grace Nosek 25:54
Yeah, I've been thinking about this so much. And I really find often my guiding star on this is Adrian Marie Brown, who I'm sure many of your listeners will know. She has a blog, a beautiful blog, and Instagram with all of these offerings of her wisdom. But she also has Pleasure Activism, which is kind of my unofficial Bible, and emergent strategy for organizers. But it's complicated, and I can see why a lot of people are quite nervous about making climate spaces joyful or full of dance or music. Because climate is suffering, like people are suffering now, and they've been suffering for a long time, and they've died and massive consequences are coming. So it's like, can we honour that while still having this joy and this humour? And I think we can, but I can see why some people might not want to, or might be averse to that. But like Adrian Marie Brown, I think our best organizing and activism comes out of joy, that when we care for ourselves and our community, and self actualize — that that is when we will show up the best to the movement, and be the least defensive, and the most open, and the most able to learn and love and lead. And then that also, it's so catching that like if if you show up in a space and other people seem hopeful, or in community, that it spreads to you. And it's a lot easier to bring people back to those spaces. So I always just try to think like, I care about this, I eat, breathe and sleep this. And if there are events that I don't want to go to, then like, how is anyone on the spectrum beyond me gonna want to go to those events that are kind of serious, there is no food, it's like kind of an exhortation. And I'm like, where do people want to be? Like, where do you want to be? What do humans like doing? I'm going to create those.
[both laugh]
Am Johal 28:08
Now, in looking at the structural problems of climate change, you inevitably run into the problem of toxic masculinity, like in terms of corporate power, to the structure of social movements even. I'm wondering how you think about that through your work as well.
Grace Nosek 28:29
Yeah. I love that question. I think they're so deeply connected, and interestingly, not getting that much talked about. Like, it's interesting. I think there's a lot of gaps, and we focus so much on recycling — sometimes these other conversations. So I have nothing against recycling, except for maybe that I know that the fossil fuel industry promoted it. So I know that it's kind of a ploy, that it takes away from groups working on toxic masculinity and climate change, or young men in the movement and climate change, all these other incredibly important ideas that we really need groups to be exploring. And there's a couple of ways this shows up really obviously — and one I think, is that there are very few men in movement spaces for climate justice. We see again and again that social science shows that men are a little afraid to show that they care — that that has become not a masculine identifier. And so wearing a mask is can be emasculating — recycling, caring about climate, doing these other things that we've been told that that's not part of what a manly man does. Which is wild that we have this gender identity for half the world that caring is not aligned with it. And obviously not all of the world embraces that identity, but kind of this forced identity structure. That seems just really dangerous and corrosive. And I had this moment, I have been organizing against Donald Trump for a lot of my life. But I had this really scary moment where I watched him come off a debate, and go to hug his wife or something. And she kind of she pushed away from him. And I know, there were a lot of memes of that happening, but his face in that moment, was the face of someone being rejected. And then on the other side, you saw Joe Biden go and embrace Jill Biden, and she really hugged him in. And it just drove home this thing for me — I was like, does anyone love Donald Trump? Like, does he feel genuine love from anyone on the planet? And if he did, would he be doing all of these things? And I just can't imagine that the answer is yes. And so, you know, I was just thinking about all of these men — and women, but because toxic masculinity shapes, all gender identities — but just if they were loved, if they were embedded in community and truly seen, I don't think they would seek to oppress. I think it would be a very different way of moving through the world. And I also really want to free men from the constraints of this, because when I work in middle schools, when I work in high schools, I can see it's so visible. The guys who don't want to be in it, but are just totally stuck. It's so hard not to be in there, especially — I'm sure there's like boys locker rooms and these things. All all these ways that the structure forces them to have toxic masculinity dominate their lives.
Am Johal 31:55
Thank you for that, I think it’s such an important observation and work that needs to be done, and talked about, and made visible. One of the things we haven't talked about yet, which I'm really, really intrigued about, is your fiction work. Your young adult fiction work, I want to hear from you about that.
Grace Nosek 32:16
I have a series called Ava of the Gaia, which is a hopeful young adult climate fantasy. And I've made the first ebook free across platforms. It's funny because Amazon keeps trying to make it not free. And I keep going back into make it free again, because I'm not giving you profit Amazon. So maybe they'll hear this and take it down. But it should be free at this moment, at least in Canada and the US. And again, this was just this moment of like — it was when Twilight was really popular, I'd say a little bit more than a decade ago. And people were making fun of Twilight and this writer, but she had hit on this emotional thing that people shaped their worlds around. People had all of the merchandise, they had the T-shirts, they were showing up at movie theatres at midnight to be like team-this or team-that. They were totally engrossed in it. And particularly, I think teens before capitalism and the way we live, drills out some of their empathy. They're so empathetic, like they're so in tune with — well I don't want to stereotype too much. But I think they care about nature and animals and humans, in a way that they haven't been forced into the hierarchy of capitalism yet? In a way that like, capitalism just forces you to desensitize because you have to be able to move down the street and be like, 'well, I'm okay that all of these people are suffering.' Like, ‘that's okay with my day,’ which is I hate that. And it's really scary, but I think teens have not had enough of that yet. And so I was just like, man, if we had like a Twilight, but it was climate justice. And we were bringing people into these connections and they were showing up at movies in their t-shirts, and just like the things that humans like, I always just want to make them climate justice. Like, it's easy. Climate Justice is an incredibly epic tale, like, there is no one more noble that I know than youth climate justice strikers, and Indigenous and racialized folks on the frontline of climate. They are actually putting their lives on the line. Every single day, their bodies — like that is the sacrifice that we hold up in our culture, over and over. But they're the ones who are actually doing it. And they're doubly incredible because they don't get to be celebrated by society, mostly, they get kind of spit on by society. Like not literally, but like 'you're holding us up, you're ruining our economy,' all of these things. And, and I just like that courage and moral clarity, is the story. That's why I'm trying to write it, or tell it in all these different ways. It's really beautiful and powerful to sacrifice your body for the future. It's what we hold up and revere as a culture, and yet, the people who are actually doing it, get very little recognition.
Am Johal 35:30
I don't know how you get that kind of time to write all those books while you're doing a PhD. But that's a different story.
Grace Nosek 35:38
Let me just say — I do just want to say cause I hate being a poster child for like burnout, or productivity culture. I have ADHD. And so I only work five hours a day, I sleep a ton, so I am doing this in the opposite way that a lot of people think I might be doing it, I just want to make sure that is very clear. [laughs]
Am Johal 36:03
I’m wondering if there's anything you'd like to add or share about what you have coming up next?
Grace Nosek 36:10
Oh man, I have so many fun things coming up. So so so many, because I have this funding, that's so exciting. That's letting me work with artists to bring my research to life and make it accessible. So I'm working on this gorgeous, gorgeous poster series. I'm actually working on a children's book with Lindsey burrows. And that's going to be this incredible — my research and her research in a picture book. 700 words tops. She's kind of looking at Indigenous legal systems, from the Anishinabek tradition. And obviously, I've talked about my research, and we're weaving them together in this tale. So we'll be looking for some kind of publisher at some point on that. But it's all about showing — like helping young kids hear their stories. And show that they've been poisoned by some groups, and thinking about new stories for their future in the world. And then I'm going to be making some memes that I'm super excited about, very tongue in cheek, very humorous. And yeah, working on a few novels and some short fiction — I just I need to tell this story, I have to tell the story about what the fossil fuel industry has done. And I have to do it, because we're still looking at the fossil fuel industry as leaders. Even though every single day they are blocking our future at like — every single day in every possible way that they know. And we're not telling that story. And also that, you know, to tell people that they're important. I think I mentioned this on the panel we are on, but most of the climate work that I do is just like affirming people, telling them to step into their power. And that they're good and that they're seen — and I don't know, we are not very kind to ourselves. That makes it hard to be kind to other people. And we're also tired and anxious and overworked, that it's really hard to kind of just take a moment and be like 'I see you I'm listening to you, I know that you're going through this pain.' And so in part, I try to really take care of myself so I can be that person for a lot of other people.
Am Johal 38:34
Grace, thank you so much for joining us on Below the Radar and sharing all the amazing work that you're doing with others. Just really wonderful to speak with you.
Grace Nosek 38:44
Yeah, thank you so much for having me. I absolutely love this podcast and your work.
Alyha Bardi 38:50
Below the Radar is a knowledge democracy podcast created by SFU’s Vancity Office of Community Engagement. This has been our conversation with Grace Nosek. You can find out more about the UBC Climate Hub, the Ava of the Gaia trilogy, and the other work’s of Grace, in the show notes below. Thanks for listening, and we’ll see you next time on Below the Radar.
[music]