Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 8, 2021 - Viva & Barnes

02:08:14

Sidebar with Chris Pavlovski - Special Guest Emily D. Baker - Viva & Barnes LIVE!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	People, right on 7. Not late, people.
	It's not late.
	Mandalore-wise, not late.
	But everyone in the chat, let me know what you think about the audio.
	F for good and A for bad.
	Okay, peeps, this is going to be a fun one.
	For those of you who don't know why you're here, Chris Pawlowski, the CEO of Rumble Inc., is on.
	This is actually the second time he's going to be on the channel.
	I don't remember when it was, but I guess it was a year ago.
	He was on prior and we had had a long discussion and it's going to be another fantastic one because I know people have questions.
	They have questions for Dave Rubin.
	They have questions for Chris Pavlovsky.
	They have questions about the whole structure of what happened.
	Rubin setting up locals.
	Locals merging with Rumble.
	Everyone being assured that freedom of speech, all of that jazz is going to be respected.
	Oh, I should probably take that.
	Off here.
	V for hair.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	These are my headphones, but I'm going to be using it as an unofficial, what are they called?
	Brett?
	Bray?
	Whatever those things are.
	Is it going to continue to respect free speech now that Rumble has gone public three weeks after the merger to locals?
	Big corporate structure changes that make a lot of people nervous, and we're going to talk about it tonight, but while everyone triple, triple, trickles in.
	I'm gonna just...
	It'll be a small rant tonight.
	Late and binger.
	I like that better than...
	I like that better than what Rakata's got.
	This is acceptable for the Viva4i channel.
	Mild rant.
	Just a tweet from earlier today.
	For those of you who haven't seen...
	Oh, there's two...
	Hillary Clinton has made two viral tweets of the day.
	One of which was an interview in which...
	Full context, I don't know because I saw the tweet, but in which she was reading...
	A letter or a journal entry or something that she had written where she started crying while reading it about how she was saying to her mother that she was going to become the first female president of the United States.
	And she started crying while reading it.
	And I tweeted out, humorous but it always reads more negative and sassy on Twitter.
	I said, even a real alligator, what did I say?
	Crocodile.
	I said, even a real crocodile.
	Has more realistic tears than this or something along those lines.
	And then a couple of people said, whoa, Dave, you're starting to sound like LeBron James.
	And I appreciate it's an expected response.
	If I criticize LeBron James for accusing Kyle Rittenhouse of crocodile tears during the trial, I guess surely then I can never accuse anyone else of shedding crocodile tears.
	I had to respond to two of them just to clarify that it wasn't that LeBron James accused Kyle Rittenhouse of crocodile tears.
	It's not because he said those are crocodile tears that made his tweet objectionable.
	It wasn't the words he said.
	It was his observation that was untethered from reality.
	In the same way as saying it's cloudy outside is not an inherently absurd thing to say unless it's a cloudless sunny day.
	In which case, if someone says, it's cloudy outside today, and I say, outside, it's not.
	It's a perfectly blue sky, sunny day, birds tweeting.
	That's an idiotic thing to say.
	Whereas if someone else says, it's cloudy today, and I don't criticize them for that, it's because context, circumstances, makes one observation idiotic and the other one justified.
	My issue with LeBron James calling Rittenhouse's tears crocodile tears was not the use of the expression.
	It was just an idiotic observation that was totally untethered to the circumstances.
	Whereas, looking at Hillary Clinton's crocodile tears, I said she could not even artificially squeeze a fake tear out of her eyes, even when she tried to tremble her voice to try to get her body to react that way.
	Alright, dog upstairs is barking.
	It doesn't matter.
	Okay, so without further ado, people, I think we're going to get into this.
	One more super chat.
	And I hear someone bringing down the dog.
	Everyone needs to cut Dave some slack.
	He thought that locals, his show...
	Well, thank you, young lady.
	You have now been seen by the interwebs.
	Follow her on TikTok.
	Don't follow her on TikTok.
	Okay, this is Winston, everybody.
	I'm going to disagree with that, but we're going to let Chris Pavlovsky...
	Explain to the world.
	I saw a chat.
	It's going to be softball questions.
	This is not PR.
	I'm not being paid for this.
	I have my own concerns.
	I have my own questions.
	I'm going to ask them to Chris because adults can have adult conversations without offending each other.
	There are no safe spaces here.
	There's just respected spaces.
	Now, Emily D. Baker, however, is our special guest of the evening as well.
	The dog is eating something.
	Emily D. Baker, for those of you who don't know, is another one of our YouTube lawyer...
	Community lawyer peeps on the interwebs.
	She has a specialty, but I'll let her introduce herself when she gets here.
	Let's start actually with Emily, because it's going to be, for the time being, two lawyers on one CEO.
	Emily, I'll go through that.
	The way you said that is going to get clipped down and memed immediately.
	I feel like two lawyers on one CEO is an After Dark episode.
	But hello for everyone who does not know me.
	I'm Emily D. Baker.
	I am a former deputy district attorney, but I swear I'm not an asshole.
	I do legal...
	Commentary in the pop culture space mostly.
	I am a giant fan of the cursey words.
	I will try to rein it in for you a little bit, but you're probably going to get demonetized anyway because you have me here, so we will try.
	But I've been a licensed attorney for over 15 years.
	I'm licensed in the state of California.
	I am a full-time legal commentator, and I have a podcast called The Emily Show in the realm of legal commentary in the pop culture spaces that is three.
	Top three in the U.S. in the pop culture commentary space.
	So entertainment news is kind of my jam.
	I didn't want to pigeonhole you.
	First of all, Emily, someone in the chat says you're using the wrong mic.
	So I don't know if that's true.
	It keeps happening.
	It's an issue on the back end of my...
	The back end of my...
	Oh, now the audio just got real ASMR.
	Okay.
	I see everybody saying, Mike, Mike, Mike, Mike, Mike.
	I need a producer.
	Hello, everyone.
	It is an issue with StreamYard.
	I apologize.
	And apparently you have a thing for Purple and Hearts because now I can see when the...
	Emily, what are your...
	The law nerd community has shown up with the Purple Hearts.
	The Purple Hearts kind of became our thing.
	But when my channel was growing and I hit 100,000 in May, I had made an offhanded joke during a live stream like, what are we going to do for 100K?
	And we had done some specialty episodes.
	We actually did an ASMR reading of the Constitution for one of our subscriber milestones.
	And we've done a few other things.
	We did an After Dark episode about a trademark dispute in the adult toy space.
	But we were joking about it, and people were like, purple hair?
	I'm like, I'll do purple hair.
	And that was in May, and now I'm in love, and I never want to have anything other than purple hair.
	And the Lonards, when I join other channels, the Lonards come in and say hello, and it's always so lovely to see them.
	So thank you for letting me know about the mic, you guys.
	I appreciate you.
	And now, by the way, I'm going to bring in Chris, because at the same time, and Chris, I'm going to put you in the middle.
	There you go.
	At the same time I say this, Chris, I just looked over to Rumble.
	I have no...
	Sorry, that's me.
	I have no doubt this is at least part because of you, Chris.
	We have now 3,400 people watching on Rumble, which is twice as much as what we have on YouTube, and that's a first.
	It's a first to outdo YouTube, and it's a first to outdo YouTube two to one.
	Chris, how are you doing?
	Good.
	How are you doing?
	Thanks for having me on.
	Super excited.
	Likewise.
	Thank you for coming.
	And so now everybody knows each other.
	But actually, Chris, for those in the audience who don't know who you are, elevator pitch before we get into it.
	For those who didn't see the first time we went streaming together.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	So I started, actually, I've been doing video websites since two decades now, since my parents' basement out of high school.
	And I remember it was like 2005.
	I was getting an MSN messenger message from one of my buddies.
	And he's like, hey, check these guys out.
	They're going to dominate the space.
	And he owned a top 50 website at the time.
	And I looked at it and it was YouTube.
	And I'm like, wow.
	And then two years later, we all know the story.
	YouTube comes along, Google buys them, and they suck up all the oxygen in the room for video, dominate the space.
	All the way through.
	And it wasn't about till 2013 where I felt like there was like a real opportunity to kind of get back into video and compete.
	And we started Rumble late 2013.
	And the reason why we did it is that I started noticing in 2010, 2011, that YouTube was really starting to preference those multi-channel networks.
	You know, I don't know if you remember those like full screen maker studios.
	Those companies and they started preferencing them and they started preferencing like corporations, brands, influencers.
	And then the friends and families, aunts and uncles kind of got deprioritized, at least from my perspective.
	So in 2013, we built Rumble to really kind of help those friends and families, aunts and uncles distribute and monetize their content.
	And we started Rumble in late 2013.
	And then by 2020.
	That's when shit kind of hits the fan.
	And it was like the middle of the summer.
	And, you know, our politics at that point in time was cats and dogs.
	And all of a sudden, we had like this massive, enormous growth happening in the conservative movement in the United States.
	And I remember it was like 11 o 'clock at night.
	I got a sign up from Congressman Devin Nunes.
	And I'm like...
	Whoa, am I under investigation?
	Like, what is going on?
	And, you know, a week later, I get on a call with him and he asks me a really simple question.
	He's like, Chris, if I bring my content over to Rumble and I search my name, am I going to be able to find it?
	Because, like, I'm not able to find it right now on YouTube or Google.
	And I'm like, absolutely.
	And he joins Rumble.
	Within like three months, he gets like 200,000 to 300,000 subscribers on Rumble.
	And he's been on YouTube for five years and only has 10,000 subscribers.
	And then the rest is history from there.
	We grow like weeds.
	We have an amazing end of 2020.
	A really good start to 2021.
	And then the politics kind of dies down.
	And then we have the largest quarter we ever had in Q3 2021 when we brought on, I think we brought on Tulsi Gabbard, Glenn Greenwald, Bridget Phetasy and many others.
	And then most recently, Russell Brand joined.
	I remember it was like September.
	It was 10 days after I started seeing Russell Brand videos.
	I'm like, is this a real account?
	We look it up.
	It's a real account.
	We reach out to Russell.
	Next thing you know, we're doing an exclusive deal with Russell on Rumble and Locals as of a couple weeks ago.
	That's the story.
	Obviously, the big news in the last week is that we announced that we're going to combine with CFEI.
	Cantor Fitztrails is one of Cantor Fitztrails' SPACs.
	And that's where we are.
	Let's actually back it up a little bit.
	Getting started on Rumble, I had been on Rumble I think since 2014 but very, very inactive until 2018 when I started hedging my bets with YouTube.
	But at first it was just a video hosting platform for cats and dogs.
	It was nothing.
	I noticed the political change or at least the ideological shift in the recent exodus from YouTube.
	When it originally started, what were the first five years like when it was lesser known as far as video platforms went?
	Yeah, I think you have probably the best pulse on that.
	I believe you had a video go viral and used Rumble to distribute that and push that video content out for you.
	So like I said, our focus when we started is to really kind of help.
	The home-based video creators, people that are creating like filming at home, cats, dogs, funny videos, things that go viral.
	We really would help that, help the creator.
	Put it onto our platform, monetize it, give them monetization tools, and then push it through all our social channels to really kind of maximize the revenue for the creator.
	And then, you know, that kind of, that still exists today, and we do a lot of that still today.
	That's a core part of what we do, and I would say the viral video content is the largest portion of content.
	Obviously, lately it's not, but it definitely was for the first seven years.
	But yeah, when it comes to someone that it's really ironic is that you're on the platform for that reason prior to you coming on in late 2020.
	Emily, by the way, if you ever have any questions, don't feel shy to interrupt, to interject.
	I think you're on mute.
	I'm just listening.
	I think it's an interesting shift when a platform just gets absolutely shifted from being, you know, Viral content in NinjaCat to a very polarized platform based on what I'm listening to with political shifts and people shutting down speech.
	That's an interesting base shift, which is a lot, I imagine.
	I'm going to take pictures of the chats and we'll get to them when they have questions.
	Bottom line, for a long time, Chris, it was pure...
	Viral videos, upload them.
	You guys were doing video licensing, rights management as well.
	And I suspect you're still doing that.
	Do you guys have agents who shop these videos around to other platforms, third-party licensing or no?
	Yeah, we still have that team that will take.
	Creators still have the choice how to upload their content into Rumble.
	Typically, what we're seeing is the majority of people don't really select that option, but a large majority do.
	Obviously, with the volume that we're getting now, it's a little more difficult to really kind of provide that benefit.
	But we still do that.
	We still have a pretty large team that's focused on that.
	And we try to help monetize that content as much as possible.
	And now, like, the great part is the biggest audience and the most revenue comes from the Rumble Properties itself now, not distributing it elsewhere.
	So that's kind of changed quite a bit.
	But, yeah, we're still doing that.
	We really kind of...
	I would say in the next couple of years, we want to put a lot of focus back into that and really kind of help the creator with their content and the IP protection and really provide a really good DRM solution for them because I think that's a real opportunity for them to maximize the revenue on their assets.
	And always, it's the choice of the creator.
	They get to choose their license.
	They get to choose how they want to work with us.
	They can keep us as simple as a Dropbox where the video is not even searchable or they can select to have it searchable.
	It's their choice.
	Uh-oh.
	Let's get into some of the tougher questions here.
	I want to bring this one up.
	Apparently, my internet is slow, so I'm asking my daughter upstairs to stop watching Brooklyn Nine-Nine because apparently bandwidth in Canada is being severely limited.
	Chris, let's go.
	So that was Rumble up until about, let's say, 2020.
	We start having mass censorship or big issues on YouTube.
	People start looking for other platforms.
	I guess, first question first, why is Rumble different than, say, Odyssey?
	There's another one called...
	Patriotube?
	What's it called?
	There's a bunch of other video platforms.
	There's BitChute, Odyssey.
	Someone in the chat helped me out.
	Emily, do you know the other video hosting platforms?
	No.
	There's one that I cannot remember right now.
	Utreon.
	Utreon is what I was thinking of.
	But, Chris, why is Rumble different than, say, Odyssey?
	What separates the two of them?
	Why should someone use Rumble over Odyssey?
	Or are they not mutually exclusive?
	Yeah, so I would say they're quite different now, and that difference is only going to get wider as time goes on.
	With the recent merger of Locals now and what we're planning to do between Locals and Rumble, I think we provide something.
	We provide a whole different funnel now for the creator.
	You can think of Rumble as being like the top of the funnel where you can broadcast your channels, you can live stream, you can do all this stuff that you typically could do on these other platforms.
	But now we have this thing where you can go to the bottom of the funnel and you can convert your subscribers into your own.
	Um, private community, uh, and, and bring them in that way.
	And I know that you have quite a lot of success with that on the locals front.
	So I think like where I see the future going, I think is the creator economy is going to move in a large degree.
	Advertising is still going to be a big component, but I do see this, uh, subscriptions and the creator owning the data and owning their subscriptions being the future of what, what happens.
	Um, a lot of these platforms are based on, you know, Little different things.
	You know, Rumble offers advertising revenue.
	They don't.
	They offer like token revenue, which is great.
	But at the same time, I really do think the way to kind of decentralize things and make things the best in terms for the creators and the audience is just making sure that you own that data.
	You know, you own that subscription.
	It goes into your Stripe account.
	We don't own it.
	And we really funnel that over to you.
	So I think that's the future.
	I think that provides the most, what's the word?
	It provides the best defense for the creator, for us never being able to cancel you.
	Because if we did, we lose that, right?
	Like, you own those subscribers in your Stripe account.
	So we have to hold you to the best standard possible.
	And if we mess up, you walk away with your own Stripe account.
	I think that's...
	That's a very compelling thing, and I think it keeps us in check.
	And Emily, if ever, interrupt, ask questions, clarification.
	I'm going to just start with a few of these questions.
	Okay, I guess first things first, what are the current terms of service on Rumble for content creators, and what are the restrictions to what they can and cannot do on the platform, what they can and cannot say?
	Yeah, so, you know, it's been the same since we started in 2013.
	Obviously, we've clarified those terms to be a little bit more transparent.
	But in terms of, like, enforcement of policy, it's always been the same.
	And there's news articles that go back many years saying that it's been this.
	But the major difference right now that we're seeing in the market is that a lot of people can't even express their political opinions.
	They can't express...
	Opinions about COVID.
	They can't even have conversations that they would have at their dinner table online anymore.
	And that's something that we're going to stand very strong against.
	When it comes to our terms, we don't allow racism.
	We don't allow anti-Semitism.
	We don't allow terrorist groups, promotion of terrorist groups on our platform and any illegal content and pornography.
	But the one thing that we're really strong about and the one thing that we're going to stay true to...
	Is that we're not going to move those goalposts.
	What you're seeing on all these platforms over the last couple of years is the goalposts keep moving.
	Everything keeps changing.
	The words have different meanings.
	It's just like a never-ending cascade of different terms coming at you every week.
	We want to be consistent.
	We want to stay true to the terms that we currently have.
	If you can have a conversation at your dinner table, you should have that online.
	And there shouldn't be anybody telling you.
	And we don't want to tell you what's right or what's wrong.
	We don't want to get involved in fact-checking.
	We don't want to get involved in any kind of editorializing of your content.
	You can have the discussion that you want to have without any obstruction from us whatsoever.
	One of the things I've seen on YouTube that kind of tags into that that they've had to strengthen their terms on is on-platform harassment.
	And harassment not just of creators, but creators harassing.
	Is that something that comes up?
	I don't know if that's come up on your platform.
	But with regard to harassment, it's not always hate speech.
	It doesn't always go to court when you get into the defamation stuff.
	And I know it's something YouTube's struggling with.
	Or does that fall under the, you know, choose your words, lose your audience, we're not going to regulate it or monitor it?
	So yeah, we've definitely dealt with some of that.
	And, you know, when it comes to That specifically.
	I think there's a lot.
	I'm not a lawyer.
	You guys are probably better at describing this than I would be, so I'm going to try not to describe it too much.
	But when it comes to harassment, I think it depends on who it is, what it's about, what exactly is being said.
	But I think what's getting lost right now is that...
	Everyone's complaining about something and everyone's trying to get everybody cancelled.
	An activist will complain that they're getting harassed and they're just not getting harassed.
	They're stretching the meaning of all these words.
	The way we're looking at it is we're just going to keep it to the same fold that we had in 2013.
	We're not going to start stretching these things and make ourselves...
	And change the meaning of our policies that we've had for a very long time.
	So leaving it truly an open form.
	Yeah, as much as possible, absolutely.
	I think that's definitely...
	If we were to do otherwise, then we don't deserve to be where we are right now.
	The whole point is to really kind of provide the form where people can have conversations and say what they want to say.
	And express their opinions.
	We think that the more opinions that there are, the more diverse the thought is better.
	We really want to foster the idea of that free and open internet as much as possible, and that's a core value of ours.
	Got to ask the question.
	I mean, you mentioned terrorist groups, anti-Semitism.
	I think you said hate speech, but I'm not sure.
	Did you say hate speech?
	So there's laws in Canada that we have to play by, being in Canada, although that's, you know, changing.
	And we'll be in the U.S. shortly here.
	But right now, when it comes to the content that's on the site, we have to obviously abide by the laws of the country and jurisdiction that we are.
	And that's what makes it really complicated.
	You know, for every country, there's different laws and different jurisdictions, and there's different things you need to play with.
	And our focus right now is to kind of just move this into the United States, really focus on U.S. law, and not really be too bothered by other jurisdictions until we expand and then have maybe different policies for different jurisdictions.
	But when it comes to the core values that we had when we started this, and it was anti-Semitism, racism were not allowed on the platform.
	So here's my, and I'm not playing devil's advocate, this is an actual...
	Question about the slippery slope.
	Some people say, you know, blaming something on Soros is tantamount to anti-Semitism, flag the video, you get a whole mass flagging campaign on YouTube.
	I mean, I guess...
	That's stretching.
	That's not anti-Semitism when you have a criticism about a person.
	Who decides if it's...
	Well, that's okay.
	So what is the process now at Rumble, if you can get into it in what detail?
	Someone says anti-Semitism.
	What is the internal process to determine whether or not a video comes down or a channel?
	Something that's not ambiguous, something that everybody, you know, on both sides, it passed tests on both sides for everybody to see unanimously that this is violating.
	As close to that as possible.
	Okay.
	And so now, do you know offhand, I ask the chat because I get emails, messages, Rumble, you know, just as bad as YouTube.
	They took down this video, that video, and I don't get into individual videos.
	I don't know of any channels that have been taken down off Rumble, but do you know offhand which, if any, big accounts at all have been yeeted, as the children say, from Rumble?
	Big accounts that have been removed off of...
	Rumble.
	I'll throw some names out that I'm not asking because I know the answer.
	Stefan Molyneux, is he still on Rumble?
	Or was he ever on Rumble?
	I don't know.
	I'm not familiar with that name.
	Have there been channels that have been taken down that you have a good example, a good reason for, or I say good reason, an official reason for that I guess it might be justified under Canadian law which might piss off Americans, but...
	Yeah, so there's been accounts taken down on Rumble for sure.
	There's been accounts taken down for pornography.
	There's been accounts taken down for various different things that violate our policy, and they're pretty overt things.
	But I would say the most common reason that people get confused in why things get taken down is The two most common things, one is copyright.
	DMCA is copyright, uploading movies, uploading TV shows.
	You can't put a full movie on Rumble.
	You just can't do that.
	You can't violate the IP.
	We really respect the intellectual property of whoever created that content.
	And the other thing that happens is there's just like...
	Putting pictures of children and stuff like that is not acceptable if you're not the parent and guardian consenting to that.
	Just random doxing of kids or something like that.
	I think there's confusion around those two things quite frequently.
	With copyright, do you have a process for fair use and copyright determination?
	Yeah, when it comes to copyright, I would say...
	I mean, obviously a full movie is an easy determination.
	Like, this is a full movie.
	Down it comes.
	It gets a little harder when people are using things that might fall under fair use in the States.
	I don't know if the fair use rules...
	I don't know them in Canada at all.
	But how you then parse copyright that way.
	Yeah, when it comes to copyright, I think that's one of the things that we're quite good at.
	We have a really good, sharp team at identifying the copyrights.
	And this comes from the history of this company managing content on behalf of creators to a large extent.
	When it comes to short clips of something, it's not there for the monetization or commercial gain, then absolutely it falls under fair use.
	But yeah, we definitely do a lot of distinction between fair use.
	Full movies and stolen content from, let's say, Viva that takes a whole show and tries to create his whole channel.
	So yeah, we definitely make that distinction as much as we possibly can.
	As we get bigger, obviously, scaling those distinctions get more difficult, and those are things that we're trying to solve for.
	But yeah, we take that seriously, and we do look at that.
	First of all, I think we should all...
	The chat has already recognized.
	Barnes is in the house.
	Robert, how are you doing today?
	Good, good.
	People want to know before we forget, what's the cigar and cigar recommendations?
	I always forget to ask you, Robert.
	Oh, this one is a Romeo e Giulietta.
	Why Churchill?
	Which you can get freely in Canada.
	Oh yeah, that's the one thing.
	That's the one leg up that Canada has on the US now, I guess.
	Actually, Chris, you mentioned your answer there and it sort of leads to another question.
	Right now, I happen to know that you have humans doing a lot of the review, if not all of the review.
	So if there's an issue, I presume people feel slighted, they think their video got removed or their channel got a problem they shouldn't have been, they can contact a human.
	How have you been able to manage that given the massive expansion, the massive explosion over the last year?
	Yeah, it's not all humans anymore.
	In terms of taking down accounts, we try to put that through a human review at the end of the day.
	There's a lot of processes involved.
	There's a lot of flagging involved by the community.
	There's a little bit of technology as well that flags.
	There's a lot of flagging on the technology, I should say.
	So it's a multi-process approach now.
	And obviously when there's three-hour videos and stuff like that, you couldn't get a human team to go through everything.
	Who's asking the question?
	Go for it, Robert.
	I'll go next.
	We can go counterclockwise.
	In terms of, it seems like the sweet spot of a big tech social media platform would be to have a lot more free speech than is available on YouTube and Twitter and Google and what have you, but not necessarily end up like Gab.
	And I know some Gab fans in the chat will now start hating on me, but the reality is I'm not on Gab because I don't want to deal with trolls and I don't want to deal with just pure, unbridled, unmitigated racial hatred.
	You know, as I get, that's within free speech.
	I don't think that's necessarily a desirable place for a social media platform to have to necessarily be.
	Well, in terms of your thought process as to Rumble, What's your take on that?
	And how do you balance out the goals of being as politically neutral and free speech promoting as possible without getting stuck down the rabbit hole of gab?
	Yeah, I know.
	I'm fully in agreement with you on that.
	That's something we kind of just touched on a little bit, but our terms of service are different than definitely gab.
	And a few of the other platforms.
	We don't allow the racism.
	We don't allow anti-Semitism.
	We don't allow infringement of copyrights, illegal content, pornography, and a few other things.
	And we find that's the right balance.
	The whole point of it is not to move the goalposts on the audience.
	People don't want that kind of content.
	And if there is that content, it's probably such a small fraction of it.
	We barely see that on our platform.
	When we do, it's gone right away.
	But the center, the neutral part of being where we are right now is not interested in that.
	We think we found the right balance.
	We stick to the principles we had in 2013 when we launched this thing.
	And it's the same the way everyone else launched.
	Whenever they launched, at whatever time they launched, we're just not moving the goalposts.
	But it's what happened in the last four years where everybody just started complaining and activism started figuring out loopholes and started pushing platforms off the edge and started pushing accounts out.
	And they figured out that all this type of activism could work.
	For us, it's about standing strong against that, not allowing that to happen and not changing our policies because we have like a very loud new individuals that say that we need to change them.
	In fact, it's our core mission now not to do that.
	It's our core mission to stand as neutral as possible and not allow that to ever get into what we're doing.
	That's what our whole focus is right now, is to really kind of restore the internet, not just on a video platform basis, but on a cloud perspective, as close to the free and open internet as we all saw it 20 years ago.
	That's what we want to do and that's what our mission is going forward.
	How do you do that as a public company, though?
	I mean, you're talking about people complaining and not wanting to cede to that, but if you are a public company, how do you balance that?
	I think that actually, that's a great question, and I think it's actually the opposite.
	I think that the fact that we are leaning into anti-cancel culture and we're leaning into free and open internet and we're leaning into the terms that we currently have and saying we're never going to do I think we have an obligation now to the investors that we raise money to.
	No, I don't think.
	I do have an obligation to make sure I don't waver on that.
	I think we're more locked in now in what we're doing than any company out there.
	If I'm a private company, I can change.
	Right now, I don't think I can change that easily because we just went out there and pitched to...
	You know, countless investors to raise a pipe, to combine with CFVI on the premise that we're going to actually be, our mission is to basically stand up this free and open internet and protect it and restore it and be anti-cancel culture.
	So I think we're more locked in than everybody.
	And I think that's kind of like a misperception is that all these corporate, you know, public companies that are kind of...
	Falling to activism feel like they need to.
	They don't need to do it.
	That's not their mission of their company, but they feel like they need to do it.
	But in our case, it is our mission of our company.
	And we are super locked in on that now, more than any other company out there.
	I don't think there's a single video platform out there that has to stand up as strong as we will have to stand up because we pitched investors on that.
	That's how we got here.
	I'm going to bring this one up and then another one up in a second because they're interrelated, but this needs to be addressed because people don't necessarily appreciate this.
	You either believe in free speech or you do not.
	Quote, hate speech, end quote, as a qualifier is nebulous, and we've all seen that slippery slope before.
	This is true.
	The first thing to say to this is, in Canada, hate speech is a thing.
	This is one thing I discussed with you, Chris, the time we had a stream.
	I said, the dirty tricks that people are going to play above and beyond, you know, bombarding the platform with CP and a bunch of other overtly illegal content to try to get you shut down.
	In Canada, we do have hate speech laws.
	I mean, there's nothing you can do about it, Americans.
	We have laws that literally say you cannot say hateful things that incite hatred or ridicule on identifiable or protected groups.
	And the Supreme Court has even alluded to the fact that you can't even say things that are true if they tend to promote hatred or whatever.
	So I said, you know, by operating in Canada, you are operating within a framework that is going to penalize any sense of what would otherwise be freedom of speech that is expected in America.
	But this is the second question.
	So that's the caveat for Canada people, so you cannot hold Chris to a standard that's not his own.
	Wait, I've got one question on that.
	With that, you said you were moving, are you moving out of Canada?
	And if you are moving out of Canada, does that policy shift?
	But we can hold it until after your second one.
	I'm just too ADHD to not have it out of my mouth and still remember it.
	Don't worry, because it's going to fit into this question, which is, will Rumble ban Black Lives Matter-centered content?
	How about if someone wanted to start a White Lives Matter-centered content?
	That's the problem with banning racism.
	It's largely bannable on YouTube, going in one direction.
	That's the question, Chris, because racism, anti-Semitism, Some might say, if you start a White Lives Matter, or All Lives Matter channel, for that matter, that's racist, and YouTube would take it down.
	It's hate speech.
	It could be hate speech in Canada.
	And how do you deal with that in a way that's going to satisfy people who now bought into the free speech protection aspect of Rumble?
	So, two things.
	The first thing, yes, we're opening up the U.S. headquarters, and we shouldn't have that opened up by middle of next year.
	That will definitely have a different dynamic for us, and we're looking forward to that.
	Two, when it comes to racism, I think the problem with these policies in the last couple of years is that the definition of that continues to be changing every day.
	What we all saw as racism in 2013 is different than what...
	Some people interpret it as in 2021.
	And the way we're looking at that is, like, we're holding it to the same standard as we did when we started this business, and we're not moving the goalposts on that.
	That's how we're going to hold it.
	That's how we're going to do it.
	We're not going to take things that are very ambiguous that, you know, some people think that is not racist in other people.
	It's got to be pretty...
	If it's racist, it's racist.
	As we know it.
	Now, a couple of things.
	One, in terms of relocating the center of operations, what was some of your thought process on that?
	But just sort of additional comment on your previous statement.
	My statement was, as soon as I read the details of Rumble's public statement, there's this belief out there that immediately you go public, that means the left.
	Controls things.
	That means the sensors control things.
	And it really depends, as I explained to our locals audience last week in a live stream, it depends on the terms and conditions by which you go public.
	If you raise money publicly based on explicit promises of political neutrality and content management and content curation, you have several hundred million reasons to stick to that promise.
	Because I guarantee you there would be a lawyer who would sue if Rumble went AWOL from that policy because of the explicit promise made to those investors.
	It locked you in in ways that was not actually the case previously.
	And I think the effect of Wall Street going woke so often has created an assumption and an association now.
	That it's because somebody goes public or it's because they are public that they have to adopt a particular ideological approach to censorship.
	And that's just not the case.
	It's the specific people who made specific decisions that were not being demanded by Wall Street that led to the big social media platforms doing what they're doing.
	There were people within the corporate boardrooms of those companies who argued the opposite.
	So I think that that's a critical point.
	I think it was misconstrued what raising money bought through a public means meant.
	And given the way in which Rumble went about it, it really did reinforce the free speech aspect of it.
	But as to the question about the, in terms of relocating operations, what led to where you're going to relocate and why relocate?
	So, it's a good question.
	And the answers are, I think Viva knows all the legislation that's happening in Canada right now, what's going to happen in the next few years is...
	It's not going to be a friendly environment for the internet by the way I see it.
	So one of the things that we're preparing for is to make sure that we have an option to be in the United States and be in a state that's very friendly to us.
	I think Governor DeSantis is on rumble and be in a community that's very friendly to this business.
	I'm not sure where things are going to go in Canada legislatively.
	But there is a lot of concern for a lot of things that could happen.
	You know, I think, was it Bill C-10 or Bill C-11?
	I keep mixing up the bills, but...
	I think it's C-10.
	Yeah, it's C-10.
	And I believe one of the ministers said, if we thought C-10 was controversial, wait till the next one, it's going to be far more controversial.
	I think that was his words from what I remember reading.
	So, yeah, you know, seeing...
	Seeing that, seeing how things are moving politically in Canada, I think it'd be very prudent for us to start thinking about a U.S. presence and a significant U.S. presence.
	And we put the gas pedal on that as quickly as we could.
	So we'll be there in the middle of next year.
	And yeah, that would be one of the driving factors.
	The uncertainty around the legislative process.
	We still have an office in Toronto and we will continue to do so, but we want to make sure that, you know, we're in an environment where the government is friendly to us.
	Chris, I'm going to bring this one up because you can't...
	Well, you'll see these comments afterwards anyhow, so there's no point trying to hide them for you, and I'm not trying to anyhow, but...
	If it's racist, it is racist that's circular.
	What do you mean by racist?
	Do you mean power plus privilege?
	Or do you mean treating people differently by immutable characteristics?
	And I mean, it'll be impossible to give an answer that's going to satisfy everybody.
	And it's going to put you on the spot because, I mean, I think I know how I would answer it in your shoes.
	But it's the question.
	Like, hypothetically, a channel that wants to discuss what some people purport to be the impossibilities of the logistics of World War II.
	Some people might say questioning the numbers is Holocaust denial.
	Is that banned?
	Some people might say talking about bell curves, talking about racial, you know, things that Stefan Molina got kicked off of YouTube for.
	Is that racist?
	And so the question is, like, where is that line?
	And who decides it on Rumble?
	And who's going to decide it going forward now that you've gone public?
	Yeah, it's a good question.
	So it's...
	For us, it's about the consistency, the way we've started, and not really kind of deviating from that.
	We have a really thick book of...
	It's called our video policy handbook that we have, which we're...
	The way we want to do it is we want to kind of go to the market publicly eventually with that and show them what our interpretation is for that and really be transparent.
	It's something that we're discussing on how to do and how to convey it.
	I think that'll set...
	Make us a little different than the rest out there when it comes to this is making sure that the understanding of what all these terms mean, obviously the definition of racist to someone might be different to another person and really kind of trying to define that in the best way possible is something that we need to do and we'll work on doing that.
	So that's something to...
	You know, that we've had discussions, I think we've had discussions as recently as last week on how to approach that.
	But that's something that we're looking forward to doing is really kind of giving a better definition of how we look at that rather than just using it as racist.
	Because it is a question is, what does that mean to us?
	You know, there used to be, and there still is, legal definitions in different parts of the world that give, you know, clarity in terms of what the circumstances are.
	I see, you know, the people say, oh, Gab has a filter option.
	Yeah, you can't get on Gab without getting harassed.
	That's my experience.
	So I get the Gab fans.
	You can complain all you want, but this issue was raised with Torba, and he went a different route.
	God bless him.
	Torba has his own views.
	Let's put it that way.
	Some of them are views I don't share.
	So I'm unapologetic about that.
	But there are clear legal definitions out there.
	And I think where YouTube went was just defining anything it didn't like politically as being somehow bad or hateful.
	I mean, as an example, Stefan Molyneux on Rumble.
	Alex Jones is on Rumble.
	You know, the people have been kicked off in the name of hate speech that really wasn't hate speech.
	Maybe somebody's motivation for something.
	Like if somebody's discussing the historical event with the Holocaust, that's a historical debate.
	Maybe it's motivated by anti-Semitism.
	Maybe it's not.
	But from my experience with Rumble, it's people just making overtly racist statements that when we see them, it doesn't have to be the Supreme Court's definition.
	Obscenity is, I know it when I see it, wasn't probably the best definition in the world.
	But there are manageable legal definitions that people have developed.
	In the racial discrimination context and in the hate crime context, it's very specific what's going on.
	And it's clear enough.
	But I'm glad to hear Rumble's going to continue to make clear what that commitment is.
	And I think that I understand some people...
	I mean, the reality is most of the people that are really upset about that are racists who just want to have racist debates and discussions and harass people.
	That's been my experience with them.
	So I get they have their own view.
	God bless them.
	But, yeah, I don't really want to be.
	I mean, on our locals' channel, I'll get people that will complain and say this is a hate speech.
	I look at it and decide yes or no. 90% of the time it's not a problem.
	It's somebody just mad with one another.
	But 10% of the time it's somebody who uses language I just don't want on there.
	So I don't have a problem with that aspect.
	There are some news descriptions that have been out there that have now described Rumble as a subsidiary of Cantor Fitzgerald and that now Cantor Fitzgerald legally completely controls and runs Rumble.
	Can you correct that?
	Yeah, I think I sent over the presentation to Viva a little earlier.
	So I'll break that down.
	That's public for everybody to go see.
	I read exactly one frame of that.
	So my survey of that has been minimal.
	But yeah, well, first of all, what is Cantor Fitzgerald to begin with?
	Because I don't know that anybody actually appreciates what that is.
	So Cantor Fitzgerald, I don't know if I like, they're a bank as far as I understand.
	I don't want to describe their company, but they're fairly large.
	And they also have the SPAC of which we merged with.
	Or looking to merge with once it's approved.
	So when it comes to Cantor Fitzgerald owning us, I'll just, you know, number one, I myself personally will have 85% of the voting control of this public entity.
	Two, our current board is the same board that I've had for, I don't know, maybe five years, maybe longer.
	It's my friends.
	There was one person that came to our board from the most recent investment that we had back in early 2021, but the majority are my friends.
	Two, Cantor Fitzgerald, the CFAC sponsor, is getting 2.5%.
	The pipe investors are getting 3.8%.
	And the CFVI public stockholders, so the people owning the stock, will have 11.5%.
	That means the rumble rollover equity is 82.2%, of which I'll have 85% voting control of the whole thing.
	And when we went to these investors, Cantor Fitzgerald specifically, They're all for this.
	We went to them on the premise of neutrality, on the premise of anti-cancel culture, on the premise of creating an internet that's free and open, both on the video side, but also building the wheels to that and really working on a cloud, on the cloud side that will be as close to a common carrier as possible.
	They're all for that.
	They believe in that.
	That's why they came to us and that's why they want to be a part of us.
	But yeah, they do not own us.
	They don't even have a board seat at this point.
	So the idea that they own a percentage of us is true, a percentage.
	But they haven't taken over this company.
	Chris, why did you choose a SPAC versus an IPO?
	And why did you choose to do it now?
	First of all, and also explain what a SPAC is for those who don't know.
	We've SPACed ourselves.
	When we looked at this, we looked at all those options.
	And one of the things that we looked at was how fast can we move?
	Speed was really important to us.
	We have a lot of momentum right now, and we wanted to capture that momentum and continue with that momentum.
	So the faster that we can raise the money, the faster we can hit the market, and the faster that we can get everything done and not be distracted with the whole process, the better.
	So that's why we chose the SPAC route.
	The SPAC route, one, was we're looking for a partner that really believed in the core mission that we are, that we're chasing.
	And two, it was really quick.
	And that's why we went that route.
	And the second question was?
	Why now?
	Like, why move fast and bring stuff right now after you guys just did the stuff with locals?
	So it feels like a lot.
	Yeah, so whether the SPAC thing was going to happen or not, locals was a discussion that happened a while ago.
	And I felt that...
	I really believe the creator economy is going to move in a large direction.
	You're seeing YouTube join.
	You're seeing Twitch join.
	You're seeing Patreon.
	And I think Rumble having us building it and competing against locals makes absolutely no sense.
	Why would we compete when we can work together?
	And I think that's kind of a problem.
	It's a little fragmented and everyone's competing.
	And if we want to have any real scale in this market, we need to kind of unite forces and work together on building something truly meaningful.
	So that's why we did the locals thing.
	The raise of money, the 400 million, is really important for two things.
	One is that we want to accelerate our growth.
	We really want to be able to afford to bring in creators from other platforms and be able to offer them real competitive rates.
	So a lot of this proceeds will go to expanding our creator portfolio and diversifying that content.
	Is the infrastructure component.
	We really need to build the wheels to this internet again.
	You can't have a free and open internet if Amazon's controlling the whole thing.
	I think they have a 40% market share.
	And I believe it's absolutely imperative that someone is focused in a really meaningful way to really laying the hardware around this country that's going to act like a common carrier.
	That's not going to act with like...
	Policies in terms and conditions that they see fit for their own ideological reasons.
	We want to build a cloud business that's as close to a common carrier as possible.
	We shouldn't look at what you're doing on your site unless it's illegal.
	You're not going to be on Amazon Web Services then?
	Yeah, you have Amazon.
	You have all these incumbent...
	Sorry to interrupt, but I'm going to.
	You said you can't have it free if Amazon's in control of everything.
	Then are you building something at the base of your company so you're not on Amazon Web Services so they can't yeet you off of their services?
	And Nancy said it more clearly than I did, but do you have your own servers or are you on Amazon Web Services?
	We are on our own hardware that we own in our own data centers.
	We very sparsely use any big tech solutions.
	We do use some.
	But they're not critical to what we do.
	If they were turned off, we'd still be working.
	Our lights will still be on.
	So no, we don't depend on any of the architecture and cloud.
	We built Rumble the old-fashioned way.
	I've been in this business for 20 years, and we built it.
	I remember putting in servers in my own Colo areas.
	I really just didn't know.
	So I'm not as familiar with Rumble as Viva and Barnes, and that's...
	Truly why I ask, because it's great, but then we see what happens with alternative media depending on who's underneath the alternative media, and they just try to turn the lights off.
	And most people don't know, and that's super important.
	That's why we really want to focus on building those wheels so that we can bring on other businesses and other institutions onto our rail rather than them having to be dependent on Amazon AWS or Microsoft's cloud services, etc.
	What was I just about to say about that, Emily?
	Well, hold on.
	Can you publish incriminating...
	I have to take notes now so I don't forget, so I can sit on my hands and not interrupt.
	First of all, interrupt is fine.
	That's what we're here for, and that's what this discussion is about.
	Chris, this is the issue.
	First of all, can someone publish incriminating evidence about powerful people on Rumble?
	Subtle speak.
	Will Jelaine Maxwell coverage, will anything related to public trials get yeeted on Rumble?
	I mean, I know the answer to that already.
	Did this happen on Twitter today?
	Yeah, they shut down.
	That happened on Twitter today.
	It came back, I think, by the end of the day.
	But Chris, this is the question.
	And this is where people can understand and this is where they get frustrated.
	If it's illegal, it comes off.
	And we all think that that should be the rule on YouTube.
	In Canada, that rule might still piss off a lot of Americans because hate speech is a thing in Canada.
	And, you know, you can't...
	And it's a thing.
	So you might have a video removed under Canadian law that would not be removed under US law.
	But then the question becomes these, what's the word, nebulous gray zones, which everyone wants to harp on as the litmus test.
	Okay, fine.
	Racism and anti-Semitism and hate speech, which may not be illegal, will still get removed.
	And then the question is, how do you draw that line?
	And where do you draw that line?
	And how do you ensure...
	That a new board of directors in the future is going to respect that line that has been drawn by old board of directors, Twitter being a prime example.
	Yeah, I think like a new board of directors is the same issue for a private company as it would be for a public company.
	I don't think that changes when deciding to go public.
	So having a board that really supports the mission is absolutely critical.
	You have to know who you're putting on your board.
	But at the same time, I think that someone that's on our board that's going to be not neutral about things is going to cause harm to this business.
	And it's going to create liability to this business for the very first time.
	Because I don't think there's a business out there that's public that leans into it the way that we're going to lean into it.
	I think this is a very new thing.
	And I think there's a lot of liability associated with pushing.
	Doing what everyone is fearing.
	And that liability alone will make sure that no one does it because if a board member comes in or a CEO comes in and all their shareholders understand this as being a neutral platform and they start going the opposite way, that's going to...
	As you guys are the lawyers, what does that create?
	I feel like that creates bigger problems.
	Well, yeah, about a $400 million lawsuit.
	I mean, that's why I was trying to tell people that the statement that you guys made, when you're making that statement while raising capital on the market, if anybody ever violates it, it becomes fraud on the market and it becomes an independent act.
	Like somebody thought, somebody in my locals chat thought that it...
	Section 230 somehow provides immunity from securities lawsuits.
	No, it doesn't.
	There's no application.
	So, I mean, Rumble made a commitment that locked them in and locked in their future people at massive economic exposure.
	And then on the other side of it is, what makes Rumble competitive is that it's the politically neutral, the public social media platform.
	In other words, there isn't a market edge in becoming mini-YouTube.
	There isn't a market.
	I mean, this is, I think Peter Thiel is right, and this was to my next question.
	This space is a designed, Thiel has argued in other contexts that this, we had Blake Masters on a few weeks ago.
	He helped write the book on this too, that the big tech is instinctively driven towards monopolistic practices due to certain unique attributes of it.
	Rumble is trying to break through that and change that equation.
	And frankly, YouTube and Google and everybody, Facebook, created a market opportunity by their censorship-heavy, ideologically-oriented approach.
	But can you explain to people, like, some people wondered why you need the capital.
	What is it you need to do to be able to stay competitive with YouTube and continue to provide the same sort of technological capabilities that YouTube or Facebook and the locals kind of analogous context provides while still relying upon the police.
	Yeah, well, definitely the continuing that growth, the capital to push that growth and bring on...
	More voices, more creators in different verticals, really emphasizing the fact that we're neutral.
	We want to bring in the top gamers on the planet on this platform.
	And we're talking to a lot of them right now.
	A lot of them don't.
	There's a lot of bad sentiment for these other platforms out there.
	And they're all looking for a place to go.
	But they just need economic incentive in order for them to make that switch to do that.
	Raising $400 million really enables us to go after some really large craters and many different craters and many different verticals.
	One of the complaints we get is like, hey, I'm on Rumble, I'm watching this show, but I couldn't find this show.
	I have to go back to YouTube and I hate going back to YouTube.
	Well, we need to fix that.
	We really need to make sure that we have content that meets the demands of the community and have that.
	A lot of the capital will go to expanding that content and really bringing in some really good stuff.
	The other thing is we're up against trillion-dollar entities that have unlimited capital here, that are building infrastructures that are across the world.
	In order for us to even take a percentage of that, we need to build something.
	Pretty good and a lot better than they do in a much quicker way.
	So a lot of this capital is going to go to that infrastructure that I was pointing to and really offering cloud services to everyone else out there, not just Rumble.
	By the way, to that chatter's question, Alex Jones is on Rumble, has been for a while.
	So that, in fact...
	I've said that that's been my definition of a free speech platform.
	If Alex Jones is on there, it's a free speech platform.
	It may not be the place for the Klan to get together, but it's a true free speech platform because he upsets and offends anybody who's in a position of power these days.
	And some other people, too.
	Normal terms clearly identify both Antifa and the KKK as not being allowed on their platform.
	So, there you go.
	I'm going to read this.
	I'm going to make a comment for Chris's benefit because Chris is now realizing what it's like to be CEO of a company gone public that has to answer demands of everybody.
	Justice for All says, why isn't the restream regular featured under live or trending?
	Salty Cracker has 10,000 to 20,000 regular viewers.
	If you're not sure what I'm talking about, buckle up.
	He's going live.
	Okay, 530.
	Is it because salty berserkers are pissed off and crazy?
	I don't know what any of that means.
	I feel like the guy from Napoleon Diamond...
	I don't understand a word you just said, but Chris, this is the question.
	First of all, I didn't mean to be a dismissive justice for all.
	Thank you very much.
	But I don't understand the actual words there, and I think that might mean that I'm old.
	I'm thinking it's one area where Rumble can improve is searchability and trending.
	And the question is, how do you do that without the manipulation that YouTube does?
	In other words, like when a lot of people hopped on Locals originally, they complained about what they could search for, what was trending, how they could...
	And I explained to them, well, this is the downside or upside, depending on your perspective, of not gathering information to spy on you on a regular basis.
	Because that's how YouTube is able to help.
	Make sure certain things trend.
	That's how they feed you certain things they think you want.
	It's because they're monetizing that personal information every single nanosecond.
	How do you balance out providing an important service that people want, searchability, trending, without getting into the data mining that some of big tech does?
	Yeah, so that's actually a really difficult thing.
	A couple things that cause us a lot of issues on the tech side that we really need to revamp.
	One is like uploading, encoding.
	That's like a really difficult process in live streaming.
	Put that all together because live stream is encoding right on the fly.
	We throttle that intentionally to manage the growth that we're going through and making sure that services are running smoothly.
	The other thing is indexing and really kind of...
	Having a really good trending, having a really good...
	I think we're getting better at that.
	I think our search has gotten a lot better in the last, I would say, 30 days.
	And I think our trending is getting a lot better and indexing the content.
	So that, I think, will get better over time.
	And I think that'll happen a lot faster than the infrastructure things.
	The infrastructure things are some serious, serious things that we're working on that are going to take significant time.
	We want to make sure live streaming is available to everyone.
	We want to make it really easy to upload from our app, which our new app will be launching in Q1 next year.
	So I'm excited about that.
	But the trending stuff, and I think there's a lot of progress on that.
	And I think, like, I saw that comment.
	They were mentioning Salty Cracker.
	He is on our homepage right now.
	He's number two on the leaderboard.
	So I'm not sure what they're referring to.
	They may be looking at the past or assuming things from the past.
	Salty is always salty, as they say.
	But he's another example of how Rumble is very much free speech committed.
	Salty is salty, but he's not illicitly so, at least in most places in most jurisdictions.
	So that's good to see.
	But yeah, I was curious about how you bounce.
	Because I think people underappreciate the way they have monetized big tech is by giving away their personal information.
	And not got compensated for it.
	One of the great things with locals is Viva and I own the content.
	We actually own the data associated with our members.
	It's not owned by locals.
	And that also keeps us in check as well.
	The fact that you have that subscriber billing in your own Stripe account, it is not billing in ours.
	It means you can walk away and we're screwed.
	It also means that Stripe can decide that they hate Viva and Barnes and shut them down.
	He'll never hate Viva.
	He's Canadian.
	That's true.
	That's true.
	That's a really good point, but just wait until what's coming around the corner on that one.
	That's why the account's in Viva's name.
	It's not in my name.
	It's in Viva's name.
	Give it to the Canadian.
	Viva's the nice one.
	By the way, that doesn't happen.
	That's right.
	Oh, yes.
	That's how I know, Robert.
	Trust me.
	The account's in my name, and Robert can't exactly come up to, what do we call, Canuckistan these days.
	I can't even get in there.
	I don't have certain shots.
	Tabernash, Robert.
	I would have never asked the question, but yeah, and nobody's rushing to come up here unless you want to get stuck in a quarantine hotel.
	You have all-dressed chips.
	They don't allow them in the United States, and it is very disappointing.
	You know what they have in the States?
	All-dressed freedom, people.
	That's what you have in the States, at least for now.
	So I'll take all-dressed freedom over all-dressed trips any day of the week.
	But Chris, this is the issue now.
	Chris, you're going to make a ton of...
	I'm going to be crass.
	You're going to make a ton of money.
	People are going to judge you for the money that you've made.
	They're going to say that you've sold out for financial interest, that you're yada, yada, yada.
	And I won't hold the money that you've made against you.
	What I would hold against you in the future is if the policies that brought people to Rumble are suddenly disregarded because now, oh, look, the tide has changed.
	The mood has shifted.
	The laws have evolved.
	Now this is deemed to be hate speech.
	If you deny the moon landing, it's considered to be conspiratorial thinking and therefore censor-worthy.
	I mean, other than...
	What are the concrete guarantees other than...
	I don't want to call it fluff.
	Other than, you know, what's the word?
	Platitudes.
	What are the concrete guarantees?
	You're touching on something that I think about every day.
	And I ask this question all the time, like 20 years ago, like when, or 15, 10 years ago, when Dorsey and Zuckerberg and all these guys were creating these platforms, how the heck did they get to a point where they were all waving the banner of free and open internet?
	You know, everyone should be able to communicate however they want to communicate.
	Here are a set of terms, pretty simple, the way Rumble's terms are today.
	And how did they get to a place where all of a sudden that changed?
	I think I asked that question to everybody I know that's close to these people, and I never really get the answer.
	But it's the one thing that concerns me the most, is how did that happen?
	How did that genesis happen where they changed?
	And the one thing that I hold myself to is to be as consistent as possible on that and make sure that I don't make that mistake.
	That's the one thing that I am really committed to.
	I'm really committed to what we're doing right now.
	I almost see it like, no, I do see it.
	It's like, it's freedom.
	We're fighting for freedom right now.
	And the ability to say what you want to say, the way you would say it at your private dinner table, we're fighting for that to happen on the internet.
	And that means more than any of the money or any, it sounds, you know, sounds whatever.
	But like, I really do believe that.
	It's like...
	Some people are going to say it sounds exactly like what Jack Dorsey, Susan Wojcicki...
	Yeah, it does.
	It does.
	And you didn't define what the mistake was either.
	You said, I don't want to make that mistake that they had made, but you did not define what you perceived as a mistake.
	You said, I've asked people and I don't know where they went wrong and I don't want to make that mistake, but the mistake's not defined.
	Why they changed from the free and open internet to an internet where they don't want to see all ideas.
	That's the mistake.
	I don't understand how that could happen.
	And I do never want to make that mistake.
	I'm committed to that.
	That's like one thing that if we don't have an internet where you can freely speak and say what you can say at your dinner table.
	Like, that's not an internet anymore.
	That's controlled information.
	That's not a world that I want to be a part of.
	I really want to create something here where you can have dialogue and be able to say what you want.
	I think it's really important to know what people think and if they want to express it.
	I don't want to hide that.
	I think that's wrong.
	And it's become very important to me in the last year, watching what I've watched.
	Like, how is it that...
	Congressman Devin Nunes came to Rumble and got 300,000 subscribers on Rumble in three months and only had 10,000 on YouTube in four years.
	Chris, I'm not playing devil's advocate for the sake of it, but how is it that President Donald Trump, the president at the time, was yeeted from YouTube?
	They said incitement of violence.
	And then the question is going to be when the pressure comes to you, because it will come to you, because right now you're...
	In the corporate sense, you're a demigod, and you're not yet the god of Google and YouTube, but you're a demigod.
	So they're ignoring you for the time being.
	But if you get big enough, they will put the very same pressures on you that they put on YouTube, that they put on Google, and they will then cause you to say, well, geez, now I'm feeling the pressure because the stakes are higher, but I'm sure Jack Dorsey rationalized every decision he made to himself to the very end, as I'm certain Susan did, as I'm certain Zuckerberg does.
	And so the issue about power corrupting is at the end of the day, you'll get to that position where you won't even recognize it, but you will rationalize the decisions that you're making, which will say the times have changed and therefore so have the policies type thing.
	That might be the black pill of the evening.
	That's a fair point.
	And I think one of the moves that we made here that enable us, that make sure that I can't waver from that is committing To raising money and merging and combining with CFEI on the premise of being that neutral platform and not doing that.
	I think that's where my liability stands.
	That's not where Jack's liability stood.
	It's where my liability will stand.
	And it's not just me saying it now.
	It's now the company's mission.
	I have put this company, I'm going to put this company in the market under that mission.
	And wavering from that mission is a liability to this company.
	So I think it's a unique concept, what we've done here.
	It's something we haven't seen.
	And it will be tested.
	And I've created it in a way that I think that it will stand the test of time.
	And it won't require just me to do that.
	Yeah, it's the best legal protection that can definitely be present.
	Because you can have terms of service, but terms of service can change.
	Terms of service can alter.
	But it's good to have these protections already in the terms of service.
	But it was far more impactful to put it on the public market.
	And I think it's greatly underestimated the legal...
	From my perspective, what I told people connected to Rumble, connected to locals and others over time was the best way to guarantee this over time is to make a public statement and raise a bunch of money based on that public statement.
	Because then you're locked in.
	Then everybody that's on the board has 300, 400 million or more, depending on the circumstances, because that amount can rise.
	It's not limited to the original initial public offering.
	It can go over time.
	And that was never the case with Twitter.
	That was never the case with YouTube.
	That was never the case with Google.
	That was never the case with Facebook.
	They made promises to creators that were not ultimately...
	They never did that.
	And that's the huge difference.
	And that's why I considered the announcement.
	Very positive announcement for those of us who want a politically neutral development.
	I think people misinterpreted it because they've seen what these big companies became when they went public.
	They think, oh my God, that's what's going to happen next.
	Somebody else is going to sell out.
	That's going to be the end of it.
	And I understand where that concern comes from, having witnessed it as well.
	But that's why it was critical the devil was in the details.
	The nature of the statement was that Rumble is now...
	Committed with huge amounts of money, every dollar they raise henceforth, to maintaining political neutrality, or they can get sued into oblivion for it.
	And everybody can be bankrupted for it.
	And I think that was underappreciated.
	And I think it's critical, fundamental going forward.
	What led you to stay on this path?
	Because the easiest thing to do would have been just to sell out now.
	You go to the competitors, give me $100 million, I'll go on an island.
	Watch Bond movies forever.
	Do what everyone's dream life is.
	Not get in the middle of a fight with these big tech giants.
	Try to take them on consistently, continuously in growth efforts, expansion efforts, competitiveness efforts, capital raising efforts.
	Why did you decide to keep going on this commitment to a politically neutral platform when the easy, lucrative financial decision would have been to take the exit ramp already?
	Yeah, two reasons.
	You know, being in this space for such a long time and watching how YouTube came to where it was and, you know, the way they got there and then the way they handled themselves kind of put a little chip on my shoulder.
	I always wanted to get back in the ring and beat them.
	But two, and like more touching than anything in the last year, in the last year and a half, is watching kind of...
	What happened from the outside and then kind of getting on the inside.
	Watching someone like Devin Nunes come to our platform, I can't tell you how powerful that was for our company to see a congressman come to our platform and accumulate 300,000 subscribers in very short order and only have 10,000 on YouTube.
	Seeing that happen, you're like, wow, what is going on here?
	How could this even happen?
	And then you're checking these other things, and you're seeing more congressmen coming, a congresswoman coming on, and the same thing's happening over and over and over again.
	And you're just sitting there and you're like, there's a real control of information happening out here, and it's really bad.
	And you kind of see this, and you're seeing it now from the inside perspective.
	And you just, it becomes a real mission, like something that really touches you to want to try and fix.
	Like, yeah, obviously there was options down the road in the last eight years that I could have taken to go a different way.
	But now I feel like if it's not us, who's going to do it?
	I think we have, I feel compelled to do it.
	I want to do it.
	I feel like I'm ready for this.
	And it's something that means so much to me now.
	We're really literally fighting for freedom in so many ways here.
	And I think this is a really big moment for everyone is to really kind of create that rail, create that platform that stands and tilts back the Internet to the way it should be.
	Well, Chris, you're going to discover that as CEO of a big company, you will never please everybody.
	You will literally be demanded to respect and answer to the questions of everybody all the time, even the questions that are mutually incompatible with other questions.
	So, I mean, it's not like godly, but you are answering or being demanded to respond to everyone's needs at the same time, even though they're not possibly reconcilable.
	Here's one, for example.
	Okay.
	Viva, you're Robert Barron.
	I don't know what that means.
	Chris Pazovsky, I never monetize my stuff, so are you going to cancel my stuff on behalf of copyright claimants, even though it is never monetized for self-gain?
	I don't know if you can answer that on this one.
	Yeah, that's a pretty easy one.
	Well, I don't know what the content is, number one.
	So if it's a movie they're uploading without monetizing it, that would be...
	Copyright infringement.
	If it's their own personal content, then if they created the works, then there's no issues.
	I see what he's really getting at.
	The fear is that the reason why these other competitors in part changed was because advertisers wanted that change.
	Now, I have reason to believe otherwise, but let's go with that.
	I think that was their excuse.
	Okay, I didn't get the spirit of the question.
	Sorry.
	There will be news on this front, but people have asked us to cancel certain creators, and we've told them to walk away.
	We're not interested in working with you anymore.
	Absolutely not.
	Advertisers will not pressure us, and we're not really focused on it.
	We're not going to allow anybody.
	We're not going to get bullied by cancel culture.
	It's just not going to happen.
	With the Locals merge that we did, I think that really allows us to really stand on some different legs here as well.
	The advertising side is going to be great.
	It's going to continue to be great.
	I see amazing demand right now on that side.
	There's a lot of advertisers that want to advertise to a large audience on Rumble that performs incredibly well.
	That's not an issue whatsoever.
	But there's also the creator economy on Locals that I think is...
	It is really important for people to understand is that you can convert a lot of your audience into a subscription that you're going to own personally.
	And I think that's like ultimately a big part of the creator economy.
	We're seeing that in Asia.
	We're seeing that in different parts of the world.
	They're like 90%.
	Subscription based and tipping rather than advertising.
	I think in the US it's more like 90% advertising, but I think that will even out in the future.
	So I'm not worried about advertisers and I'm absolutely not going to get bullied by them whatsoever.
	Here's my observation.
	Bottom line, and people may not like it, I don't actually expect anything from Rumble.
	I don't ask for any favors, and I don't think you owe...
	If you screw me as a creator who has been backing Rumble because it's free speech-oriented, non-sensitive, if you screw me, okay, shame on me.
	I've learned my lesson.
	I appreciate Robert's argument that now you've made warranties and representations to a mass public as...
	Shareholder representations.
	And if you violate them, you risk being sued.
	You'll have your defenses and good luck in court and that's all there.
	In the meantime, however, until you violate those promises, and I feel violated, in the meantime, you're still more free speech oriented than any other platform out there that I know of that is one that I would want to frequent.
	The question is though, practically, do you notice that advertisers actually want to spend more money per view on Rumble versus YouTube because My theory is that the people who are objecting to objectable content or what they find to be offensive content are not purchasers, and advertisers would actually like to advertise on popular stuff, even if it's edgy.
	So what do you know of your cost per ad on Rumble versus YouTube, and are advertisers actually flocking there now because of the product you're offering?
	So, you know, I think you might see this as well.
	If you take a look at the CPM rates that we're able to fill, They're quite high in comparison to YouTube, at least generally what we see for a lot of the accounts.
	We're seeing...
	Wait, they're quite high.
	What's quite high?
	Well, I don't know.
	On a legal channel...
	Emily, I'll send you the referral.
	No, I want to know if they're quite high, but what's the scope of quite high?
	Because on some commentary channels, quite high for them might be 7 to 8, but on some other channels, that might be...
	We can push $10 on some channels.
	And I think that what we're seeing with the performance and what I'm hearing from the partners that we do work with and the advertisers that we do work with is that...
	We have some incredible performance on the ads that we have on Rumble right now.
	One advertiser, a lot of them just keep increasing their budgets and wanting to do more and more and more with us.
	I think it's a very underappreciated audience on Rumble that performs significantly higher.
	We didn't really have a lot of conservatives on Rumble like three, four years ago, but I can tell you that on a per unit basis right now, the rates are better than they were two, three years ago.
	That might be because of time or it might be because of audience.
	Definitely things are moving in a forward direction, and our feedback from our advertisers have been phenomenal.
	One advertiser told us that we outperform on a RON campaign, like a run-on network campaign, better than a targeted Facebook and Google campaign, which is, to me, that's quite the surprise.
	But apparently there is some good performance on the platform, and we really look forward to it.
	We really actually look forward to launching our entire own ad marketplace on Rumble, where these advertisers can buy and select their channels they go into.
	And that's coming around the corner, actually.
	So we're really excited about that.
	I think that'll be really interesting because then if advertisers have that level of control to pick creators...
	It's more likely that advertisers stay, even if some people say, well, we don't want you advertising on this.
	It's like, well, we don't need to pressure Rumble.
	If we can go in and pick who we want to advertise on, then there's no reason for them to have an adpocalypse like YouTube did, because you or Rumble's not selecting.
	The channels that the ads go on, the advertisers are selecting the channels, and I think that's a really interesting way to deal with the issues that YouTube ran into, where advertisers didn't have control over what channels their ads went on, and that's what caused part of the problem.
	And that's exactly what we want to do.
	We want to make it as transparent as possible, and then we'll give them the option if you want to advertise everywhere and take up all the traffic.
	Creator's ability to opt out because I've been slamming a particular company on my channel based on a lawsuit.
	And guess whose ads keep coming up for all of my...
	Everyone's like, I'm watching this video.
	You're yelling about Triller.
	And Triddler ads are showing up on my video.
	And I'm like, those motherfuckers.
	You know, Emily, it might explain why I get so many COVID vaccine ads on my YouTube channel.
	Yes, allowing that, I really do appreciate.
	I'm not asking the hard questions to be snarky.
	I just like to define what we're talking about so I understand what we're talking about.
	But knowing that advertisers can opt in.
	Gives your platform the flexibility to say, fine, if you don't want to advertise on Alex Jones, don't.
	Just opt out of it.
	We're not going to run it blanket, which is what advertisers deal with on YouTube.
	Those blanket ads.
	And that's why we had Adpocalypse.
	So it's a really interesting proposition.
	Yeah, that's exactly where we want to go.
	Let's creators say, hey...
	I don't want these companies advertising on my stuff because there are companies I don't agree with and I have no choice right now because what gets advertised on my content is shown based on the viewer, not based on me, the creator, which I understand.
	You talked about your $400 million, some of it going to bring over creators and you want to keep the platform ideologically neutral.
	Are you running into issues with who's already on the platform and that kind of Guilty by association that the internet seems to love right now.
	No, it's not as prevalent as you might think.
	A lot of this stuff is a lot of the animosity and all this PR that we're seeing about this.
	It just doesn't seem like it's as real as it is when we go out there.
	We're having quite a lot of success with that.
	And I think you'll see a lot more success in the future with us bringing on creators.
	More so a year ago than we are now.
	I think now we have a lot of different voices on the platform.
	It's getting a lot easier.
	We're not really running into that as an issue at all right now.
	I want to bring this one up.
	Would Soph be allowed?
	If Alex Jones is allowed, Soph would be allowed.
	For anybody who doesn't know who Soph is, she was at the time she got banned, the 13-year-old kid on YouTube.
	Quite edgy.
	I do think...
	In the last video, she might have pushed a line specifically on the last video, which called out Susan Wojcicki and had a certain sound effect that is arguably menacing.
	But I want to bring this one up, because I missed it the first time, and I don't want anyone to think that I'm deliberately skipping Super Chats to get another Super Chat to get the same question up.
	Worked at Fang, and I don't know if that means Swalwell's girlfriend's place.
	People will get that.
	Biggest problem is blue-pilled progressive staffers pushing entire orgs against exec will to current state of things via DAI, ESG.
	I don't know what that is.
	Hiring practices.
	Diversity, inclusion, equity.
	I don't know what ESG is, but I suspect it's the same thing.
	What do you do to avoid the same problem while scaling Chris to you?
	No, that's a great question.
	I think, you know, being Rumble.
	It kind of filters out a lot of people that want to work here and don't want to work here.
	So we haven't really had any issues.
	Everyone that kind of joins this company is all in on the mission and they really believe in what we're doing.
	And I think that's the core thing.
	You need to believe in our mission and really want to be a part of creating a free and open internet.
	And the opposite of that is it just doesn't work for you.
	I think the mission itself of this business...
	And what we're doing filters out any of that.
	Everyone's got to be aligned on wanting a free and open internet and be against cancel culture here.
	So I think that kind of settles that pretty easily for us.
	You describe its future revenue streams, that the old focus was monetizing people's private data and selling that to people, and secondarily or co-equally advertising money, but that increasingly the subscription model provides an alternative model.
	For financing and funding technological platforms, particularly for those people that want uncensored access to the content creators that they prefer, and giving content creators the confidence that they can say whatever they feel, even if it may upset or offend a particular advertiser.
	In the right-leaning space, for example, Black Rifle Coffee advertised a lot.
	I hear their coffee's terrible.
	That's what I hear.
	I hear it's really bad.
	It tastes like dung.
	That's a rumor.
	Your taste, Black Rifle Coffee, is tainted because of their conduct.
	I think we can all agree on that.
	No, no, totally not.
	It's independent.
	I just hear this a lot.
	As Donald Trump would say, everybody's saying it.
	Everybody's saying it.
	I'm not saying it, but everybody else is saying it.
	Putting that aside, but how much do you think the subscription model, that servicing that subscription model is part of what you're trying to do?
	Because that may provide a better, cleaner access for certain independent content creators and for people to get the content that they want going down independent and totally divorced.
	From the advertising, monetization of people's information and data.
	Yeah, and that's a great point.
	I think that's going to be a real big chunk of this business going forward.
	I actually think one of the more underestimated and underappreciated sides is that, as well as the infrastructure as a service business that we're kicking off.
	And really building that cloud.
	I think there's...
	I don't think, I know that the demand exists, whether it's like universities, religious institutions, there's like serious demand to get off the incumbent platforms.
	There's a lot of fear and there's a real lack of trust right now with a lot of these incumbent platforms.
	So I think that we'll be able to generate significant revenues on the cloud side and in a more immediate future be able to generate Decent revenue on the subscription side.
	I think that's a very, very undervalued, underappreciated part of the creator economy that people don't see.
	Obviously, the advertising revenue will come.
	And that's one of the things that boggles my mind is like, you know, we don't have this data and targeting, but how is the ads performing for some of these advertisers on a...
	As good basis as the Google and Facebooks that are using the data to target and do all that stuff.
	So that also kind of like makes me question things like how real is that?
	What really is happening?
	I don't know, but I do know that it does perform on Rumble without even doing that.
	So that's a good start.
	I see the three buckets of revenue for us are going to definitely be advertising.
	It's going to be subscriptions and tipping.
	And it's going to be infrastructure as a service.
	And when I think the infrastructure as a service and the subscription and tipping are going to be very underappreciated buckets of revenue for us that I think we can surprise the market with.
	Chris, I've been accused of ignoring the rumble rents.
	Sorry, say that again, Emily?
	I was just saying I'm waiting for a payment processor.
	I will be happy when I see it.
	But it's one of those things in independent media that's got to come from somewhere.
	And at some point, someone will create it.
	Whether that will be Chris, I guess we will see.
	That's a really interesting comment.
	I'll leave it at that.
	I do have a question about the payment processor, but we'll get there in a second.
	I don't want to ignore the Rumble rants, by the way, because Rumble has a similar feature as YouTube Super Chats.
	They call them Rumble rants.
	Rumble only takes 20%, so it's better for the creator and it's better for the platform if you want to support what you think to be a free speech platform.
	By the way, I'm not sponsored by Rumbled.
	I'm not sponsored by Rumble.
	And I don't think anybody is here.
	This is an honest message.
	People ask me, I have no investment in locals.
	No investment in Rumble.
	I'll be happy to sue them if they ever violate their promises.
	Robert.
	Robert's like, I'm an open opportunity.
	I will sue you.
	I will be happy to sue people.
	I will be happy to sue from Canada so long as I don't have to leave my basement.
	Oh, I just lost the chat.
	Ron Rumble Rant says, this is from the Slow Rider.
	It says, I hope subscriptions from millions of people is in your future.
	Conservatives are ready to do it.
	That's one.
	Someone just texted me.
	I have to go check that in a second.
	But there was another Rumble Rant that I missed.
	And I'm going to get to all these Super Chats that I've been taking pictures of.
	Maybe not all of them.
	The Slow Rider said, love the Winston, the Winnie, who is becoming one of the U.S. great conservatives.
	I don't consider myself conservative.
	I consider myself just to be reasonably open-minded.
	If that's what conservative means these days, so be it.
	Has hiring for scalability been a headwind?
	Great question.
	No.
	In fact, it's conversations that I'm having with very high up people in these companies, large, the FANG companies, wanting to come over to Rumble is...
	Impressive, to say the least.
	And very shocking in the sense that I didn't expect the flood that we're seeing, the talent that wants to leave.
	And from what I'm hearing in the background, it's a significant...
	I remember having a conversation with one person, and we're talking high-up people at these companies, saying over 50% of their staff do not like what they're doing over there.
	And they want out, but no one can pay, and they don't know who the leader is.
	And that was, you know, that was quite striking to me.
	And we really saw this change in the last three or four months.
	Maybe it's because Rumble's, you know, we've become a little bigger.
	Or I don't know what's happened.
	But in the last three or four months, we've seen this accelerate to a rapid pace.
	And hiring is, we don't have enough time to interview people.
	That's our issue.
	We have so much talent coming in, we can't find time to do the interviews.
	But the talent is definitely there, and it is one of the more shocking things to see how large this talent pool is.
	And I think it's far larger than anybody thinks what's happening.
	But a lot of people want out of these large companies, and they want to move to things like Rumble.
	And it's significant.
	This is a significant thing that I think people don't really see.
	But we're seeing it, definitely.
	I'm not surprised by that, because you're seeing a lot of people in big tech being tired of their perceived manipulation or the manipulation of big tech over content and viewpoints.
	So I'm not surprised.
	People are like, I'm just tired of using tech to manipulate perception.
	But nobody has asked the most critical question, and I feel like we have to go there.
	Are you giving out content creator awards?
	And are you waiting to 100,000?
	Are you waiting then till a million?
	Are you doing them sooner?
	At the heart of all creators is the need for attention.
	So how is Rumble feeding that need for validation and attention?
	You know what?
	We have to do that.
	Creator awards are significant.
	We need to do it.
	How should we do it?
	Tell me how we should do it and I'm going to put that in motion.
	100,000, 500,000, a million.
	Viva's won a couple of awards, so he can speak to it.
	I'm not sure if YouTube would give him the award again today, but they gave him a couple of awards.
	Are you talking about this Shorty Award for Social Good back when it actually didn't matter where you were politically aligned, even though I'm not politically aligned?
	Best overall YouTube presence.
	I don't have anything.
	Awards, I'm not so interested in awards, but I do appreciate that people like milestones.
	We can call them milestones and not awards.
	That's an easy thing to do.
	The question is, and it was a previous Super Chat on the YouTubes, what are you doing in order to, what's the word, attract talent?
	What's the content creator attraction policy strategy for Rumble right now?
	So, is this in terms of bringing on new creators?
	I know you guys did a deal, I think, with Glenn Greenwald as an example.
	What are some of the different approaches to get content creators to shift to Rumble?
	Yeah, so this is like a big part of this phrase, is that we want to go out there and...
	Invest in a lot of creators to come onto our platform and provide them guarantees on a monthly basis so that they can produce that content and bring that content on an exclusive window basis to Rumble and exclusive live streams to Rumble.
	That's something that we're going to really put the gas pedal on once this closes.
	A very big part of our plan right now is to do that, is to really use a lot of that capital to bring on a lot of good talent in all different areas of content.
	I just want to bring this up because everyone's saying this is an infomercial for Rumble.
	I'm hoping Chris is not going to be mad at me after this stream is over.
	Sorry.
	Because Chris knew he was coming on with three lawyers.
	I appreciate that Robert...
	Barnes, my buddy on Locals, my friend who I've known for years, and I appreciate that Robert is more optimistic about the going public, and I understand his arguments.
	I'm more skeptical because I do say once you go public, you are answering to shareholder value and not a private enterprise.
	Now, I do appreciate private enterprises change their raison d 'être, and if the shareholders don't like it, F you, sue me, which they do, and that's what I was brought up on in terms of my practice.
	Same thing for Public.
	So, if they don't like it, sue you and then work it out in the courts, but that doesn't actually respond to the needs of the creators who are there.
	So, Robert is optimistic about it.
	I am still skeptical, but I don't think Rumble owes me anything.
	But Chris, are you thoroughly traumatized about an evening spent with three lawyers?
	No, I love it.
	It's great.
	I think it's needed.
	I think, you know, I've seen a lot of chatter and people talking about, like, is Public going to make it?
	I wouldn't have done it if I thought it was going to make it worse.
	I think it's worse to stay private.
	I don't think we have a chance to fix the internet if we did stay private.
	I think it is imperative that we raise this capital.
	It is absolutely imperative that we build the infrastructure.
	It's imperative that we went this route, ultimately, because I wouldn't be locked in on a mission.
	Where I could change overnight.
	If I was private, I could change overnight and not really care.
	Or I could sell really easily.
	Things are a lot different now.
	There's a lot more liability and there's a mission that I'm really glued to now.
	So I did this because I think it's the best route to go.
	And I really challenge anybody that says that it's not.
	I know that history shows that the last tech companies that did this, they built businesses.
	They didn't build businesses to create a free and open internet.
	No one has tried that.
	That's what we're trying to do.
	And I think you've got to give that a chance.
	I think it's important that we give it a chance because no one has tried it.
	And let's see how it goes.
	Obviously, you know, we have jaded opinions based on what other companies have done, but they weren't glued to this the way we are.
	We put this foot forward in the way that we did, purposefully, knowing that this is going to create some real independence for our community and really give this platform a fighting chance against these trillion-dollar entities.
	Remember, they're trillion-dollar entities.
	Amazon, how much market share do they have just on the cloud side?
	I think 40%.
	YouTube on the video side is like dominant monopoly on video.
	How do you go up against these guys?
	You can't do it private with a couple million dollars.
	It's just not going to happen.
	I'm not going to be able to attract creators with a couple million dollars and attract a lot of them.
	I'm going to need a serious pool of money.
	I'm going to need some serious...
	I'm going to need the public support.
	That's what you're going to need.
	And this is the only way to scale this to get to a point where we can actually tilt back the internet to the way it was intended to be.
	And that's what we're doing.
	Would welcome that conversation and why that's a bad idea.
	I put so much thought into this and I really am convinced this is the best way forward to do what we're doing.
	How else would you approach a free and open internet and lock it in the way we did?
	Here's a question.
	By the way, I'm going to get into a rant about the FU money that people think you probably have in a second.
	Is Trump ready to rumble?
	And then I'm going to get into another super chat underneath that, but is Trump ready to rumble?
	We know what he's done.
	Any discussion on that that you can disclose publicly?
	And I don't know if there's any discussion privately that you're not allowed to disclose.
	Full disclosure.
	Yeah, so I believe it was reported last week that we have some servers with Trump.
	On the cloud side, and it was confirmed on Friday that that was the case.
	We are a cloud provider for the Trump Media and Technology Group.
	There'll be more details in the coming days or in the future, but I'll keep it to that.
	But that's just like us living up to that mission of being a common carrier on the cloud side.
	We're going to be providing cloud services.
	And we'll provide services for the 44th president, the 45th president, and so on.
	It doesn't matter.
	We're a neutral cloud provider, and we're excited about providing those types of services.
	In terms of the locals-Rumble combination, is the primary focus going to be Rumbles providing some technological components to locals and locals integrating aspect of Rumbles into it?
	Or is it going to go beyond that?
	Is there going to be more integration than just that in terms of for locals members and local subscribers in terms of what Rumble provides for them?
	So we're definitely going to move all the infrastructure side.
	Of Rumble into locals.
	So that way, you know, the cloud side, all that, that needs to be ripped out and it needs to be on Rumble effectively as soon as possible.
	So we'll definitely be doing that front.
	I have a lot of ideas on that front.
	Asaf and I have really thought...
	You know, deeply on this.
	We really want to have a lot of the content, you know, if the creators have a lot of content in their locals profile, have that index on Rumble.
	Rumble be kind of the top of the funnel to kind of lead into your locals community.
	We think that's really important.
	We want to have that indexed in Rumble so people search and they can find it, take you to your locals profile and your locals community.
	We really want to integrate the two to really drive more value for the creator.
	Anything that's going to lead to more value for you, we're all for.
	And we're going to really step on the gas in doing that.
	But yeah, the infrastructure thing is a no-brainer.
	That's happening.
	It's happening right now as we speak.
	We're working on that, bringing in the player, bringing in the live streaming, bringing in the cloud infrastructure.
	All of that is happening.
	And then on top of that, we really want to integrate on the Rumble side to really bring in.
	We do not want to change the core components that you guys love.
	And we won't change those.
	I think, if anything, what's going to happen is that we're going to really give you that same type of ownership on Rumble over time so that Locals is already providing on the subscriber side.
	I think that would be a really cool feature to give to the community and really be a competitive edge for us against the competition.
	So I think the more we empower you, the more independence we provide you, the more reason you want to be with us, and the better chance we have in winning.
	I'm going to bring this up, and then I'm going to try to read some of the Super Chats I've been screenshotting with my iPhone, taking pictures of.
	The real Bambunga, who everyone who's been on this channel for long enough knows, makes some good jokes.
	For Chris, as a big, fat, loudmouth myself, I love to Super Chat just to get David to say some embarrassing things.
	In the last stream, by the way, I brought up a Super Chat that had emojis that I didn't know what they meant, and I was worried for a second.
	But maybe that's why that live stream got...
	Demonetize.
	But it doesn't matter.
	Does Rumble offer a similar opportunity?
	And how soon can I abandon YouTube to take advantage of a similar method of telling horrible jokes?
	Rumble rants.
	It's there.
	I mean, I can answer that question for you, Bamboonga.
	And thank you for all of the support throughout.
	It's been two years now.
	Did anybody just hear that kid screaming upstairs?
	Yeah.
	I don't know when I need to answer the question when I don't.
	Kid doesn't want to go to bed.
	Too bad.
	Put the kid to bed!
	I'll be up there in a bit.
	Will it be a free platform for folks that have...
	Oh, it's a very interesting question.
	Gun precision.
	So YouTube, for anybody who doesn't know, demonetizes and basically deters any channel that specializes in Second Amendment issues or gun functioning.
	YouTube seems to be shutting them down ad hoc, especially with the new rules.
	Shall not be infringed.
	Still a suggestion.
	Is it right?
	Okay.
	Squidmonkey asked a question.
	A good question.
	And then we'll get into some more stuff.
	But Chris.
	I mean, any of those types of restrictions on Rumble?
	No.
	Short answer.
	Good question.
	Okay, Emily, would you like to have a question while I scroll through my iPhone to get those pictures of those Super Chats that I have?
	Well, I asked about Creator Awards, but I do have to ask about Terms of Service because you've talked about them quite a lot.
	And the Rumble Terms of Service do have some vague words in them, like...
	Offensive to the community.
	And then there are some definitions, but of course they're not exclusive or exhaustive.
	Will those things be defined more as you are getting ready to go public?
	Some things will be dropped off completely.
	And the other things will be defined more.
	I think we've removed some things recently as well.
	So as we refine ourselves here, the idea is not to get more.
	Okay.
	We won't expand, is basically what I really don't want to do.
	I want to make the goalposts as clear as possible.
	I don't know.
	I don't want to move those goalposts, I should say.
	And I want to make those terms as clear as possible.
	So those are things that work.
	Yeah, things like grossly offensive to the online community.
	It's like, well, things that I might find grossly offensive.
	Is it under video?
	I might not find grossly offensive.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, there's a lot of legal jargon that's been in there for a long time that goes into there.
	And those are things that we obviously need to put more thought into as we go forward and provide a lot more clarity as well.
	I think that's the key.
	I think communicating those policies is the key.
	But more importantly than anything, I think our actions will speak louder than words.
	How we've been for the last eight years has been very consistent with our policies.
	And I just want to continue being like that.
	But absolutely, we're definitely going to provide more clarity as time moves on here on those type of things.
	Was that under video content policies or is that under like...
	It is under rumble content policies.
	And I appreciate the answer because I think one of the things that I have had issues with with YouTube as well is...
	And my husband as well, let's just be honest, is can you define that more clearly?
	Like, what do you mean by the words that you are saying?
	And YouTube doesn't always define that.
	And I realize that lawyers ruin everything.
	So it makes it hard to narrowly define it because you also don't want to get sued because something's too narrowly defined and you can't get rid of something because it doesn't quite fit in another category, but it's clearly a problem.
	So that's where I think communication and community.
	Clear communication with defined terms really helps because it's not, you know, when you get to your other content material that's pornographic obscene of an adult or sexual nature, it's fairly clear what that includes.
	But the, you know, things that are much broader than that are difficult when they're not clearly defined to creators to know where their boundaries are.
	And it's something I've seen YouTube struggle with.
	So it was a question I had to ask.
	Yeah.
	Well, I brought this one up for a while and I just, Again, it's not to put Chris on the spot.
	You're going to have to respond to everybody's issues as a CEO, and there may be more or less of these.
	The interview of non-answers and redirects has convinced me.
	Deleting my Rumble account tonight.
	Good luck.
	Okay, now here's the issue.
	This is a legitimate perspective.
	It's a legitimate point of view.
	It's an observation.
	In as much as, you know, LeBron James looked at Kyle Rittenhouse and said he's fake crying, it's an observation.
	You can't disagree with that.
	Where are you going to go?
	And what's the best alternative?
	And are they going to be any better than this?
	Now, the question is this, Chris.
	People say, you know, you're going to get FU money out of this.
	And I've always said FU money is useless if you can't walk the streets without being publicly reviled by everyone around you.
	So Fauci, I have no doubt, is getting FU money up the wazoo.
	But it'll be nice when an individual cannot freely mingle with society because he has violated their trust so greatly.
	What's your assurance you're not going to violate the trust even once you've gotten your FU money and want to move off to the Bahamas?
	It might be redundant to what we've already asked tonight, but I guess the question is, what is your moral obligation to those who you are appealing to now?
	FU money.
	I guess what do we define as FU money?
	I felt like I've already had that opportunity.
	It's already come many years ago in the sense that I didn't really need to...
	I could have taken a different path.
	I chose this path only because I really passionately care about it and I feel like I'm defending something that is extremely important and we're one of the only ones out there doing that.
	I think that alone, I think actions speak louder than words.
	Everyone's more interested in words these days.
	I think how we walk, the talk, is what's going to matter.
	What I'm going to say is not going to convince people.
	But how we act and what we do will over time.
	And I think over time, you'll see how Rumble acts.
	I think I put a lot of good things in place to make it as defensible as possible.
	Um, for the core values that, uh, that I care about and that I think a lot of you care about and, uh, you know, whether I was here or not, I think that there's this, it's going to, it's going to stay, but, but I want to be here and I'm not going anywhere and I'm going to, I'm going to defend these values myself and, and, and push forward.
	And I think, like I said, actions speak louder than words.
	Let's see what happens.
	Let's see where we go.
	Um, and, We'll see where we are in a year from now.
	Do you think once the company goes public, you will stay this accessible?
	Because Elon Musk has run into a little trouble here and there by being so accessible.
	Once you're a public entity, everything you say all of a sudden has different meaning and is different in all the rest.
	What's your intentions in that respect?
	Yeah, and that's, like, one of the things that you notice, like, oh, can you say that now?
	Like, shit.
	Like, lawyers are like, make sure you don't say this.
	I'm like, what?
	No, I think that's kind of something that has to happen now.
	I think that when you put yourself in this spot, that's going against, you know, a lot of these other tech companies.
	It's important that I make myself accessible, and I'll continue.
	I think Vivo is one of the first podcasts I've done.
	And I wanted to make sure that it was the first one I go on when I did this.
	And I'll do others.
	I'm open to doing more.
	But absolutely, I think being accessible is important.
	Understanding how I think is important.
	And understanding just generally how I see this company and how we see ourselves in this space is important.
	So yes, absolutely.
	I'm accessible.
	I'll be here anytime you guys want.
	And I love being here.
	I've been listening to a lot of Tom McDonald these days, and so maybe you have to be accessible, but not to the point of giving yourself away and being owned by everyone else around you, but that's the line you're walking right now as CEO of a big company promising big things to everyone on earth who wants those big things.
	So, from your mouth to God's ears, but take care of yourself first.
	Now, I want to bring up, when are you going on Tim Pool's show?
	Have you been on Tim Pool yet?
	No, I've asked to go on a while ago, like a couple weeks ago, but no response.
	Okay.
	Well, Viva's got friends at Tim Pool.
	We'll see if this bit...
	We'll see if this clip doesn't get clipped.
	This section doesn't get clipped.
	Retweeted and retweeted so that Chris can go on and defend himself, Viva Voce, in person against...
	Oh, jeez, I forgot his name.
	Robert, what's his name?
	Ian was skeptical.
	Yes.
	Thank you, Barnes.
	Now you make me look like an idiot, Robert.
	What's that guy's name on the Tim Pool show?
	How will you prevent rumble from becoming a mom?
	There's Lucas and Ian.
	It was Ian who called out the risks of going public.
	A discussion is worth being had right now.
	Tim?
	I think they were a little upset with the locals' transaction.
	No, a lot of people were because it was a misnomer.
	It was not a buyout.
	It was a merger.
	But I think that could have been forgiven.
	Coupled with what appears to be a buyout or a sellout or going public three weeks later, that'll add some salt to the wound.
	Salty crackers in the house going to put in some reads in the chat.
	But this, Chris...
	And then I'm going to read some of the super chats before we leave.
	How will you prevent Rumble from becoming top-heavy with the algorithm?
	Big channels getting off here.
	Good question.
	Yeah, that's a great question.
	So definitely, right now, the way search is really, really simple.
	It's based on views and time and metadata.
	It's as simple as that.
	When we launch this new app, we're really going to push this.
	This swiping feature where it really goes through content that people like based on ratios, not based on views.
	So the likes and the dislikes are going to matter.
	YouTube walking away from likes and dislikes, I think we're going to really go in on that big time to identify different content and make it discoverable in the app.
	So that is to be coming in a couple months.
	And I look forward to that.
	And I think that will help.
	But as of right now, the search and all that stuff is definitely based on views and metadata and time.
	So that will get top-heavy until we figure something else to make other things more discoverable on that front.
	But right now, it's like the KISS model.
	Keep it simple, stupid.
	We don't want to have crazy algorithms in search.
	That's kind of what is our competitive advantage right now.
	So we'll lean into staying away from the algorithms.
	But I do think that we'll have some cool discovery tools in the app that could help on that front.
	One question that was asked a lot was, and I get this asked randomly, if people are interested in working for Rumble, is there a place they can go to submit their resume, find out whether they have a skill set that fits what you're looking for?
	What is the easiest place for them to go to to do that?
	Yeah, absolutely.
	You go to corp.rumble.com and there's a link there.
	We have someone monitoring that account, looking for talent, and we're hiring quite a lot.
	I brought up a chat about B Corp.
	In my limited experience, and I've had experience with B Corp, B Corp is BS, and it is about filling out...
	Checks in a box, and it's effectively like certifying charities that don't actually do anything charitable.
	That's my humble opinion.
	Don't quote me on it, but you can quote me on it.
	It's just my opinion.
	Mark Cock?
	I don't know if that...
	Okay, I'm so cynical now.
	That's a legit last name, and now I've had dirty thoughts.
	But thank you very much, Mark.
	I'm going to read a few superstars before we go for the evening.
	I said your spotty internet made that interaction a lot better.
	It was pretty funny.
	The kids are off the internet now, so it is just Canada falling to the technological overlords.
	Winston is my spirit animal says, you should have a creator liaison as a member of your board that is elected by creators.
	Very interesting.
	Pensive says, You asked how Facebook and Twitter changed from waving the flag of open internet.
	It was the employees.
	They came from the college as indoctrinated activists and simply fought for change.
	Legitimate.
	I got the rumble rants.
	Mark Koch.
	Back in the house.
	Coach.
	Coach.
	Or Koch.
	Koch.
	Koch.
	Viva, you saw this one.
	We already brought this one up.
	Ads brought money.
	Bullies used advertisers as levers to change policy.
	Follow the money.
	That is from Mike Riendo, who I believe is from the neighborhood.
	And then we've got Quix.
	Searchability, transparency removes some speculation.
	What sort of waiting does Rumble provide to search?
	Any open sourcing code?
	I don't understand what I'm reading right now.
	Side note, do you need information security professionals?
	That's a good question.
	Chris, do you have an answer to that question that I don't even understand what I just read?
	Yeah, I think I understood.
	I think I just answered that, though.
	Is that a question about how our search functions?
	I would have to reread that question, and that would involve opening my phone and going back.
	Yeah, if it does, I'll answer that really quickly.
	Like I said, it's very based on views right now.
	The time of the video and the metadata.
	It's a basic type of search function.
	It's not anything unique.
	And that's how we display our search results right now.
	And then also, you have to select the right license in order to get indexed.
	You won't get indexed on every license that you choose.
	Chris, I don't want to read it out loud.
	Any such requirements?
	I mean, you're operating in Canada, so you might, but COVID prevention requirements to work there?
	Does Rumble have a vaccine mandate for employees?
	Robert cuts right to the chase.
	No.
	I've never asked anybody.
	I never will.
	Yeah, imagine treating people's medical information as private.
	I don't know, it used to be something in this country.
	Robert, we'll talk about it on Sunday, but in New Brunswick, the government has suggested that they are open to banning the unvaccinated from getting groceries.
	But don't worry, you have other means of getting your life-saving essential items.
	Foo Bard.
	Fubard, Canada's Fubard.
	Rolf Peterson says, if, as I once thought, the greatest use of the practice of law is explication of truth, I would expect such a practice to be at the basis of any powerful, useful platform.
	Without the Constitution and rule of law, any such endeavor will fail, in my humble opinion.
	What's going to be Rumble's Constitution?
	Say that again, Emily?
	I talked over you, sorry.
	They've already said it publicly in the sense of the public commitment to the market, which I think is mostly not understood because very few people are familiar with it.
	In other words, the number of people actually invest in the market.
	What, 5%?
	I mean, most people are indirectly invested through their 401k or their IRA.
	The number of people who are daily active in the market is a very small percentage.
	And then the number of people who understand fully the legal consequences of the statements that Rumble made, it was the equivalent of a constitutional commitment that locked them in monetarily.
	To maintaining political neutrality.
	It's the best commitment.
	It's what people like me have asked for for some time.
	And so that's why, because it's the best legal protection you can have for a politically neutral, committed social media platform moving forward.
	So that's why I celebrated it, because it was essential, in my view, to be able to maintain and sustain the ability for Rumble to not only compete and scale up.
	But also to commit to the same values that those of us who care about it the most want to see.
	So congratulations is due.
	And I think...
	Oh, hold on one second.
	I don't want to get in trouble here.
	This says, fourth time...
	Son of a beasting.
	Internet is so slow when I bring it up, it's already gone by the time I...
	Okay.
	Fourth time.
	Considering Bill C-16 and such, would I get banned from Rumble for misgendering someone?
	Emily, you are so smart.
	And I presume that heart is intended to be purple if you had that option.
	Will you get banned from misgendering?
	What is Bill C-16?
	Another crazy Canadian bill.
	It is the bill that added misgendering to aggravating factors for certain crimes, basically protected class.
	And it added gender identity to protected class constitutional.
	Most importantly, allowed self-definition for that.
	In other words, whatever the victim's definition of their gender is what governed.
	Because that was Jordan Peterson's original debate.
	He was like, who defines the gender?
	Does somebody subjectively dictate to me what gender they are, or does biology dictate or something else dictate?
	And to be even more fair to Robert, who might think he's being antagonistic, when you're gender fluid...
	The literal designation can vary on a day-to-day basis, and I'm not saying that to be glib.
	It's purely subjective.
	Someone else's subjective interpretation of their gender, and if you don't recognize it or respect it, you can be punished.
	But to my knowledge, Rumble has no policy on that.
	Chris, if you misgender someone, if someone claims that they're being harassed for misgendering, how does Rumble respond to that?
	To be honest, I don't think we've ever dealt with an issue like that, and I don't think we would misgendering.
	If it's law in Canada, I think we'd have an obligation to do it, but I'm not familiar with this at this point.
	To which you're going to see a bunch of comments, get out of Canada and get into a place that does not have these laws.
	And in fairness, in Canada, we've talked about it, it's not quite as clear-cut as misgendering goes to human rights violations.
	Yeah, they're playing games with the law up there.
	So what is next?
	I mean, look, we'll cut it now or sooner than later, but what's next for Rumble?
	What can people expect?
	Bottom line, where can they reach you?
	Where can they apply?
	Where can they advertise through if they have questions for advertising, employment, subscription?
	Where can they find everything that is Rumble?
	Yeah, so...
	In Q1 next year, we're going to have a big rollout, which I can't wait for.
	We're going to be launching our new app on iOS, our new app on Android, our new TV apps on Apple, Roku, all of them.
	So I'm really excited about that.
	I know a lot of people complain about our interface.
	That's coming to an end, hopefully.
	There are some screenshots in our deck that's out there that you can look at to see what it looks like.
	I think it looks pretty cool.
	We're pretty excited about it.
	So that rolls out, and you'll see that probably late Q1 kind of rolling out on each device.
	You can find our apps on the iOS store currently, Android stores.
	Not all the connected TVs, but the main ones, Roku, Amazon, Apple, Android.
	And yeah, I guess the latest news is that we're looking to combine with CFEI and hopefully that pending approval, that should be done next year, sometime next year.
	And then we'll have $400 million to go out there and really build that infrastructure that currently we've built up quite a bit of it, but really kind of expand on that and really go after a lot of creators, bring a lot of creators onto our platform, invest in a lot of these creators and bringing and creating new content.
	And obviously, integrating locals in a better way is exciting to us as well.
	Yeah, I'm looking forward to 2022.
	It's going to be an interesting year, to say the least, in terms of what we can do.
	But it'll be a telling year, for sure.
	And I don't want to forget this.
	Payment processors.
	I know that Locals uses Stripe.
	Rumble uses PayPal and other...
	I mean, so that you don't get stuck getting cut off by payment processors who don't like your politics anymore.
	How do you hedge against that?
	There's something coming that we'll update everybody on in short order, but we are very aware of that being a potential issue for some creators, and that's something that we're going to be able to provide some more choice for.
	Now, obviously, a lot of people are going to want to continue to use Stripe.
	Because they built a lot on there.
	It'll be your choice whether you want to diversify that and use something else or continue to just only use Stripe.
	But we want to provide another choice where you can feel more safe and secure and also just provide more choice for the creator to choose.
	All right, people.
	Robert, Emily, did we not get to anything tonight?
	We covered it quite a lot.
	Okay, everyone in the chat.
	I didn't get to all the Super Chats, and I think I got to all the Rumble rants, but thank you very much for the support, for the questions.
	Anybody says that this was a PR for Rumble, easy questions, bullcrap.
	And as much bullcrap as LeBron James saying that Kyle Rittenhouse was fake crying, bullcrap.
	So I actually am, I hope Chris and I are still friends.
	But jokes inside.
	Everyone in the chat, thank you very much for the support, for the questions.
	Chris, Emily, Robert, stick around.
	We'll say our proper goodbyes.
	Everyone else, stay tuned.
	Sorry, most important question.
	I do not own any rumble.
	What is the ticker symbol and what was it trading at as of close today?
	Well, you know, we're planning to merge with them.
	We're not merged yet, but the SPAC that we're looking to merge with is CFVI.
	And I think it closed at around $15 today.
	Okay.
	And the closing should be announced when to the extent that it happens?
	Penning approval.
	It should be...
	I don't know.
	There's not an exact date, but sometime next year.
	Okay.
	And that might have been the one question I probably should not have asked because it might have required confidential information that I do not have that I don't know if you're allowed to disclose.
	Okay, people, you know where to find everything.
	Emily, we might have to get you on Rumble.
	Everyone in the chat, thank you very much again.
	We will all say our proper goodbyes until Sunday.
	Emily, actually, I'm sorry.
	You have to plug yourself before we leave here.
	Where can people find you?
	You guys can find me over at the Emily D. Baker all over the internet.
	I am on a personal crash course to 200,000 over here on the YouTubes before the end of the year, which is a personal mission.
	I also have the Emily Show on all your favorite podcast apps, which is a top...
	Free entertainment news podcast.
	So, that is where you can find me.
	The Emily D. Baker.
	Sometimes I'm on the Twitters.
	Sometimes on the Instagrams.
	Always on the YouTubes.
	And Robert, where can people find us?
	At VivaBarnesLaw.Locals.com Alright, peeps.
	And with that, enjoy the evening.
	We will see you if no later than Sunday.
	But probably earlier.
	Peace.
	And I'm going to end this.

▲