1
00:00:09,073 --> 00:00:11,160
Today, in the palm of your hand,

2
00:00:11,356 --> 00:00:14,226
you have access to a world of information.

3
00:00:15,055 --> 00:00:17,802
You can reach a multitude of new sources

4
00:00:18,318 --> 00:00:20,950
and exchange your views
with a wide range of people

5
00:00:20,950 --> 00:00:22,186
all over the world.

6
00:00:23,146 --> 00:00:27,056
This new reality should allow us 
to share a wisdom,

7
00:00:27,401 --> 00:00:30,216
to communicate, to understand each other

8
00:00:30,593 --> 00:00:34,044
and to become more understanding 
of our differences,

9
00:00:34,051 --> 00:00:35,751
more tolerant of our differences.

10
00:00:36,582 --> 00:00:41,073
But 2016 seems to have replaced
the information age

11
00:00:41,073 --> 00:00:43,204
with the post-truth era.

12
00:00:44,013 --> 00:00:46,494
With Brexit and the Trump election,

13
00:00:46,494 --> 00:00:48,458
we have found, we have discovered,

14
00:00:48,458 --> 00:00:52,315
that more communication 
doesn't mean more information.

15
00:00:54,262 --> 00:00:56,322
Let me show you what I mean.

16
00:00:58,937 --> 00:01:03,762
Here is a picture of the 
Trump inauguration ceremony in 2017,

17
00:01:04,338 --> 00:01:08,499
and the same picture of the 
Obama inauguration ceremony in 2009.

18
00:01:09,174 --> 00:01:11,751
The White House declared
that the Trump ceremony

19
00:01:11,751 --> 00:01:13,911
had been the largest in history.

20
00:01:17,259 --> 00:01:18,851
Did you know

21
00:01:19,273 --> 00:01:22,295
that 28% of Trump supporters

22
00:01:22,295 --> 00:01:25,876
said they believed there were 
as many people, if not more,

23
00:01:25,892 --> 00:01:27,502
at the Trump ceremony.

24
00:01:27,882 --> 00:01:30,479
30% said they didn't know. 
They were not sure.

25
00:01:30,891 --> 00:01:33,961
And 41%, that is less than half,

26
00:01:34,467 --> 00:01:37,555
said that they disagreed 
with the White House statement.

27
00:01:38,636 --> 00:01:43,128
When you see these pictures, 
these views may seem crazy.

28
00:01:44,101 --> 00:01:47,496
So how is it that people can believe 
something so clearly untrue?

29
00:01:48,441 --> 00:01:49,471
But wait a minute,

30
00:01:49,471 --> 00:01:53,097
Are you sure that you would never 
believe something so clearly untrue?

31
00:01:54,143 --> 00:01:55,366
Think about it.

32
00:01:55,475 --> 00:01:57,974
These pictures are not proof.

33
00:01:58,274 --> 00:01:59,968
They could have been photoshopped.

34
00:02:00,421 --> 00:02:01,988
They could have been swapped.

35
00:02:02,721 --> 00:02:05,106
So when somebody raises
these doubts to you,

36
00:02:05,315 --> 00:02:07,625
you will have to use your own judgment

37
00:02:07,625 --> 00:02:10,232
to weigh the evidence
and make up your mind.

38
00:02:11,120 --> 00:02:13,776
So now suppose that you were
a Trump supporter.

39
00:02:14,300 --> 00:02:15,745
Are you sure

40
00:02:15,745 --> 00:02:17,660
that you would not give any credence

41
00:02:17,660 --> 00:02:19,343
to somebody raising these doubts?

42
00:02:20,129 --> 00:02:22,270
Are you sure that you
would never entertain

43
00:02:22,270 --> 00:02:25,130
that perhaps there were more people 
at the Trump ceremony,

44
00:02:25,130 --> 00:02:27,137
and that these pictures are not proof?

45
00:02:28,112 --> 00:02:29,992
Today, I want to put to you

46
00:02:29,992 --> 00:02:33,802
that the cause of the fake news success
lies primarily with us.

47
00:02:34,345 --> 00:02:35,693
Fake news works

48
00:02:35,693 --> 00:02:37,607
because we are willing to believe it.

49
00:02:38,103 --> 00:02:41,163
And because we are willing to believe it, 
we lie to ourselves.

50
00:02:42,725 --> 00:02:45,209
If we want a sound public debate,

51
00:02:45,209 --> 00:02:48,934
we need to stop lying to ourselves
when we engage with the news.

52
00:02:50,733 --> 00:02:53,905
Let's consider an ideal public debate,

53
00:02:54,155 --> 00:02:56,694
and think about it as a battle of ideas.

54
00:02:57,575 --> 00:02:59,965
All ideas are voiced and debated.

55
00:03:00,965 --> 00:03:04,863
A good idea is convincing,
and it wins over less convincing ideas.

56
00:03:06,005 --> 00:03:08,076
The philosopher Karl Popper

57
00:03:08,076 --> 00:03:11,087
said that this process
should lead public debate

58
00:03:11,488 --> 00:03:13,466
to select the best ideas.

59
00:03:13,980 --> 00:03:18,292
Unconvincing ideas disappear, 
and only the good ones survive.

60
00:03:19,087 --> 00:03:22,505
And science seems like a perfect example

61
00:03:22,528 --> 00:03:25,917
where public debate
leads to selection of the best ideas.

62
00:03:27,265 --> 00:03:28,823
With this view in mind,

63
00:03:28,823 --> 00:03:32,654
the Internet should have 
a positive effect on public debate.

64
00:03:33,342 --> 00:03:37,342
On the Internet, ideas are free 
to be voiced and criticized.

65
00:03:37,836 --> 00:03:42,136
Good ideas should be able to convince 
more people and spread around,

66
00:03:42,604 --> 00:03:44,434
and bad ideas are abandoned.

67
00:03:45,288 --> 00:03:46,698
But when you look,

68
00:03:46,698 --> 00:03:50,169
that's not necessarily what is happening
on the Internet at the moment.

69
00:03:50,553 --> 00:03:51,810
So why is that?

70
00:03:52,430 --> 00:03:58,184
Well, perhaps, this view 
of the public debate is a bit unrealistic.

71
00:03:59,206 --> 00:04:03,986
In 1949, Max Planck famously joked 
about this vision from Popper.

72
00:04:04,444 --> 00:04:08,827
Max Planck was a theoretical physicist 
who eventually won a Nobel Prize.

73
00:04:09,755 --> 00:04:10,972
He said,

74
00:04:10,972 --> 00:04:15,625
"A new scientific truth doesn't triumph
because it convinces its opponents;

75
00:04:16,500 --> 00:04:19,588
rather, these opponents get old,

76
00:04:19,870 --> 00:04:21,364
and eventually they die,

77
00:04:21,364 --> 00:04:24,211
and they are replaced by 
a new generation of scientists."

78
00:04:24,849 --> 00:04:28,066
And what Max Planck 
was alluding to with irony

79
00:04:28,470 --> 00:04:32,900
was to the reality of debates
with humans, us.

80
00:04:33,502 --> 00:04:37,522
Us humans, we are not designed 
as perfect rational thinkers

81
00:04:37,522 --> 00:04:39,746
only looking for the truth.

82
00:04:39,962 --> 00:04:44,063
The fact is that often, 
we are attached to our ideas.

83
00:04:45,470 --> 00:04:47,161
We can be attached to ideas

84
00:04:47,161 --> 00:04:49,599
because some ideas
may be convenient for us -

85
00:04:49,858 --> 00:04:51,037
for interest.

86
00:04:51,949 --> 00:04:55,573
So going to the example 
of the scientists of Max Planck,

87
00:04:55,573 --> 00:04:57,513
these scientists may have become famous

88
00:04:57,513 --> 00:05:00,832
because of the ideas
that they proposed in the past,

89
00:05:00,832 --> 00:05:02,514
and which are now old ideas.

90
00:05:03,094 --> 00:05:06,914
Abandoning these ideas would be
losing part of the credit they got

91
00:05:06,914 --> 00:05:09,716
for proposing these ideas 
in the first place.

92
00:05:10,748 --> 00:05:12,315
But it's not just in science.

93
00:05:12,315 --> 00:05:13,680
If you think of politics,

94
00:05:13,680 --> 00:05:16,925
if a government proposes
to extend social welfare,

95
00:05:17,853 --> 00:05:19,793
those who would receive social welfare

96
00:05:19,793 --> 00:05:22,499
have an interest to believe 
it's good for the country.

97
00:05:23,302 --> 00:05:25,907
And those who would have to pay
for the social welfare

98
00:05:25,907 --> 00:05:28,574
have an interest to think 
it's bad for the country,

99
00:05:28,574 --> 00:05:30,515
it's a bad policy for the country.

100
00:05:31,739 --> 00:05:34,991
But we are not just attached to ideas
for material interests;

101
00:05:34,991 --> 00:05:36,320
it's much more complex.

102
00:05:36,320 --> 00:05:39,196
Often, we can be 
emotionally attached to our ideas.

103
00:05:39,719 --> 00:05:41,951
They may be part of our identity.

104
00:05:42,375 --> 00:05:45,965
So if I'm a Christian conservative
or a left-wing liberal,

105
00:05:46,585 --> 00:05:49,158
these ideas may be part of who I am.

106
00:05:49,812 --> 00:05:54,319
Abandoning these ideas 
could be losing part of my identity.

107
00:05:55,517 --> 00:05:59,001
As a consequence,
we are attached to our ideas.

108
00:05:59,492 --> 00:06:02,413
So we're not neutral judges

109
00:06:02,660 --> 00:06:05,410
when we're considering 
the evidence for or against them.

110
00:06:06,306 --> 00:06:10,771
On the contrary, 
science and behavior

111
00:06:10,771 --> 00:06:14,148
show that we typically 
engage in self-deception,

112
00:06:14,420 --> 00:06:18,090
which means that we are
building beliefs which are compatible

113
00:06:18,553 --> 00:06:21,397
with our interests 
and with our other beliefs.

114
00:06:22,110 --> 00:06:24,976
Self-deception is subtle,

115
00:06:24,976 --> 00:06:27,843
it takes place all the time
in your everyday life.

116
00:06:27,843 --> 00:06:29,655
So I'm going to give you two ways

117
00:06:29,655 --> 00:06:32,215
in which self-deception
can change what we believe in

118
00:06:32,215 --> 00:06:34,372
and produce convenient
views for ourselves.

119
00:06:35,277 --> 00:06:37,212
First, when you receive some news,

120
00:06:37,999 --> 00:06:41,313
you have some flexibility 
in how you consider it.

121
00:06:41,996 --> 00:06:46,148
If it's positive news
which is compatible with your beliefs,

122
00:06:46,148 --> 00:06:49,040
you can accept it as positive evidence.

123
00:06:49,804 --> 00:06:51,061
And if it's negative news,

124
00:06:51,061 --> 00:06:53,443
you can to the contrary
choose to discount it

125
00:06:53,443 --> 00:06:55,740
and not choose to consider it.

126
00:06:55,798 --> 00:06:57,607
Let me tell you about a study.

127
00:06:58,336 --> 00:07:01,312
A group of people 
were asked about beliefs,

128
00:07:01,312 --> 00:07:04,024
political beliefs 
and non-political beliefs.

129
00:07:04,560 --> 00:07:06,612
For their political beliefs,
they had to say

130
00:07:06,612 --> 00:07:10,684
whether they believed in statements
such as "Abortion should be legal" -

131
00:07:10,684 --> 00:07:14,300
very loaded statements,
typical of political statements.

132
00:07:14,584 --> 00:07:18,785
And non-political beliefs 
were statements such as

133
00:07:18,883 --> 00:07:22,173
"Second-hand smoking
is dangerous to your health."

134
00:07:23,787 --> 00:07:25,282
So what happened is

135
00:07:25,282 --> 00:07:28,651
that these people were confronted
with contradictions to these beliefs.

136
00:07:28,651 --> 00:07:31,054
What do you think people did?

137
00:07:31,054 --> 00:07:34,554
How did they react when they were 
confronted with these contradictions?

138
00:07:35,326 --> 00:07:40,146
Well, here's how people reacted
with their non-political beliefs.

139
00:07:40,704 --> 00:07:45,015
So you have the strength of their beliefs
before the contradiction and after it.

140
00:07:45,630 --> 00:07:47,883
So when faced with a series
of contradictions,

141
00:07:47,883 --> 00:07:49,670
they updated their beliefs

142
00:07:49,670 --> 00:07:53,502
and the strength of their beliefs
was lower after facing contradictions.

143
00:07:54,205 --> 00:07:55,915
But now look at what happened

144
00:07:55,915 --> 00:07:59,210
when they were faced with contradictions
to their political beliefs.

145
00:07:59,602 --> 00:08:03,702
Here you can see that people resisted 
the contradiction much more

146
00:08:03,702 --> 00:08:06,640
and held to their political beliefs.

147
00:08:07,725 --> 00:08:11,568
That's one way we selectively
interpret the news.

148
00:08:11,865 --> 00:08:13,128
But there is another way.

149
00:08:13,128 --> 00:08:16,575
We're not just receiving the news; 
we're looking out for it.

150
00:08:16,690 --> 00:08:19,467
We are selecting where we want 
to look for information.

151
00:08:19,658 --> 00:08:22,095
And typically, we look for
confirming information.

152
00:08:22,592 --> 00:08:23,939
If you are a conservative,

153
00:08:23,939 --> 00:08:26,522
you are more likely
to read a conservative newspaper,

154
00:08:26,615 --> 00:08:28,732
to watch a conservative news channel,

155
00:08:28,780 --> 00:08:31,810
and perhaps even to turn off
the TV or the radio

156
00:08:31,810 --> 00:08:34,193
when a left-wing politician 
is being interviewed.

157
00:08:35,318 --> 00:08:39,318
Let me show you a hypothetical scenario.

158
00:08:39,718 --> 00:08:43,315
Let's say that you wake up in the morning
and you open your newspaper,

159
00:08:43,783 --> 00:08:45,261
and in one scenario,

160
00:08:45,261 --> 00:08:47,423
you've got some news which is not good -

161
00:08:47,423 --> 00:08:49,240
it's a contradiction to your beliefs.

162
00:08:49,721 --> 00:08:53,016
Let's say that this news suggests
that your favorite politician

163
00:08:53,016 --> 00:08:54,907
is involved in a political scandal.

164
00:08:56,739 --> 00:08:59,794
And consider the other situation, 
where to the contrary,

165
00:09:00,390 --> 00:09:05,299
the news in the newspaper is positive -
it goes with your usual beliefs.

166
00:09:05,927 --> 00:09:09,586
Perhaps it's another politician, 
a politician you do not like,

167
00:09:10,048 --> 00:09:12,138
who is involved in the political scandal.

168
00:09:13,246 --> 00:09:15,440
Do you think, do you feel,

169
00:09:15,737 --> 00:09:19,051
that you'd react in the same way
to these two situations?

170
00:09:19,894 --> 00:09:21,805
Well, research shows that you would not.

171
00:09:21,805 --> 00:09:26,081
Most likely, what happens
is that if you find a contradiction,

172
00:09:26,333 --> 00:09:28,718
you tend to look for all the news sources.

173
00:09:28,900 --> 00:09:30,949
You give yourself a chance
to find something

174
00:09:30,949 --> 00:09:32,979
which will contradict this negative news.

175
00:09:33,813 --> 00:09:35,140
Perhaps another newspaper,

176
00:09:35,140 --> 00:09:37,636
perhaps you will read
the fine print in the newspaper

177
00:09:37,636 --> 00:09:42,023
to make sure that the title
was really reflecting the information.

178
00:09:42,460 --> 00:09:44,810
On the contrary, 
if you have the positive news,

179
00:09:44,810 --> 00:09:46,545
you're more likely to stop there,

180
00:09:46,972 --> 00:09:50,369
you're more likely to be happy to consider
that this piece of evidence

181
00:09:50,369 --> 00:09:53,122
is enough for you to make up
your mind on this issue.

182
00:09:54,554 --> 00:09:59,353
So as much as we would like to think
of ourselves as rational thinkers,

183
00:10:00,043 --> 00:10:04,043
it is a fact that this tendency 
to look for confirming news

184
00:10:04,043 --> 00:10:07,900
and to reject negative information 
is ingrained in us.

185
00:10:09,563 --> 00:10:11,308
So now before you panic

186
00:10:11,308 --> 00:10:16,371
and you think that our irrationality
is making public debate impossible,

187
00:10:17,019 --> 00:10:18,759
you can relax.

188
00:10:19,393 --> 00:10:23,671
These bars have existed forever, 
way before social media.

189
00:10:24,330 --> 00:10:26,700
So what's happening with social media

190
00:10:26,715 --> 00:10:30,130
is that they are exacerbating 
some of the effects of these bars.

191
00:10:30,946 --> 00:10:33,775
Let me give you two ways 
in which they are doing so.

192
00:10:34,314 --> 00:10:37,485
First, on the Internet 
you have much more freedom

193
00:10:37,485 --> 00:10:39,869
to look for the information 
which is convenient

194
00:10:39,869 --> 00:10:41,618
to whatever beliefs you have.

195
00:10:42,616 --> 00:10:44,943
The Internet is like a giant supermarket.

196
00:10:45,764 --> 00:10:46,984
For any kind of idea,

197
00:10:46,984 --> 00:10:50,449
you'll be able to find arguments for 
and supporting this idea.

198
00:10:51,344 --> 00:10:54,322
Let's consider a crazy idea as an example.

199
00:10:54,447 --> 00:10:57,912
Let's consider that you believe 
that the Earth is flat.

200
00:10:58,891 --> 00:11:01,542
Well, 30 years ago,
you would have been a bit alone

201
00:11:01,542 --> 00:11:05,388
and maybe struggling to find people
to give you evidence for this.

202
00:11:05,529 --> 00:11:07,799
Today, you can just 
connect to the Internet,

203
00:11:07,799 --> 00:11:09,850
contact the Flat Earth Society,

204
00:11:09,850 --> 00:11:13,580
and this society is going to provide you 
with elements of evidence,

205
00:11:13,645 --> 00:11:15,844
arguments in favor of your belief.

206
00:11:17,809 --> 00:11:19,122
That's another way

207
00:11:19,122 --> 00:11:22,015
in which the Internet helps you
engage in self-deception,

208
00:11:22,015 --> 00:11:23,861
that you can do it collectively.

209
00:11:24,422 --> 00:11:27,232
You now have a multitude
of communities on the Internet

210
00:11:27,232 --> 00:11:30,402
that have created
informational bubbles on their own.

211
00:11:31,412 --> 00:11:34,254
In these bubbles, 
people select information,

212
00:11:34,498 --> 00:11:36,691
interpret information,
and repackage it

213
00:11:36,691 --> 00:11:39,525
in a way that is compatible 
with the community's views.

214
00:11:40,159 --> 00:11:42,784
When a new fact is discussed 
in this community,

215
00:11:42,784 --> 00:11:46,755
the images which are positive 
for the community are reinforced,

216
00:11:46,815 --> 00:11:49,732
and those which are not are dropped,

217
00:11:49,792 --> 00:11:51,688
and the nuances are lost.

218
00:11:52,724 --> 00:11:55,859
These communities build simple views

219
00:11:55,859 --> 00:11:58,561
compatible with the beliefs
of the community.

220
00:11:59,416 --> 00:12:03,136
So the social media have not created 
a unified public space

221
00:12:03,160 --> 00:12:04,979
where ideas are debated;

222
00:12:04,999 --> 00:12:10,862
instead, social media have increased 
our ability to connect specifically

223
00:12:10,862 --> 00:12:14,424
with the people whose views 
mostly match our own.

224
00:12:15,606 --> 00:12:17,132
And whatever your views,

225
00:12:17,132 --> 00:12:19,940
you can find a community
of like-minded people

226
00:12:20,147 --> 00:12:24,667
with whom you can share arguments
supporting your existing beliefs

227
00:12:24,667 --> 00:12:26,210
and not challenging them.

228
00:12:27,903 --> 00:12:29,466
But what do you want?

229
00:12:30,466 --> 00:12:35,896
Do you want a unified public space 
where ideas are debated, discussed,

230
00:12:35,896 --> 00:12:37,880
and where maybe the best ideas can win,

231
00:12:37,880 --> 00:12:39,928
or a compartmented public space

232
00:12:40,215 --> 00:12:44,235
where different visions of the world 
can coexist unchallenged?

233
00:12:44,996 --> 00:12:49,939
Well, if we want to defend and support

234
00:12:50,075 --> 00:12:52,336
the existence of an open public space,

235
00:12:52,336 --> 00:12:55,801
we need to realize
that the problem starts with us,

236
00:12:56,567 --> 00:12:58,634
with how we form opinions

237
00:12:58,634 --> 00:13:00,862
and how we share them on the social media.

238
00:13:01,579 --> 00:13:06,379
So perhaps, in the post-truth era 
we need some guidelines

239
00:13:06,379 --> 00:13:08,962
about how to interact on the social media.

240
00:13:09,862 --> 00:13:11,471
Here are three steps.

241
00:13:12,277 --> 00:13:13,784
Step 1:

242
00:13:14,448 --> 00:13:18,749
Avoid the narrow selection of information
which closely match your views.

243
00:13:19,912 --> 00:13:21,502
Make sure that in your timeline

244
00:13:21,502 --> 00:13:24,123
you've got some news sources 
which challenge your view.

245
00:13:25,339 --> 00:13:28,522
Try to find people with whom you disagree

246
00:13:28,703 --> 00:13:30,783
and exchange with them.

247
00:13:31,230 --> 00:13:33,205
Listen to what they have to say.

248
00:13:34,026 --> 00:13:36,544
Try to appreciate the points 
that they may have.

249
00:13:37,556 --> 00:13:39,726
Give them a chance to change your mind.

250
00:13:42,182 --> 00:13:43,409
Point 2:

251
00:13:44,044 --> 00:13:45,293
Question your views.

252
00:13:46,162 --> 00:13:48,673
The more you'd like an idea to be true,

253
00:13:48,874 --> 00:13:52,664
the more you need to distrust the way
you made up your mind about it.

254
00:13:53,386 --> 00:13:55,796
Are you sure that you considered

255
00:13:55,796 --> 00:13:58,778
all the best counterarguments
to the views you have?

256
00:13:58,978 --> 00:14:02,457
that you've considered the possibility
of weak points in your reasoning?

257
00:14:02,468 --> 00:14:04,212
Try to find them.

258
00:14:04,986 --> 00:14:07,134
Whenever you really want 
an idea to be true,

259
00:14:07,134 --> 00:14:09,494
you may remember
that at some point in your life,

260
00:14:09,494 --> 00:14:12,092
we all liked to believe in Santa.

261
00:14:14,169 --> 00:14:16,660
And even though we really wanted
Santa to be true,

262
00:14:17,503 --> 00:14:19,839
it didn't make it more real in the end.

263
00:14:20,156 --> 00:14:22,380
So the more you'd like an idea to be true,

264
00:14:22,380 --> 00:14:26,199
you need to be wondering,
Is it too good to be true?

265
00:14:26,324 --> 00:14:29,010
Do I believe this 
because I want to believe it

266
00:14:29,010 --> 00:14:30,954
or because of the evidence?

267
00:14:31,499 --> 00:14:33,305
Could it be another Santa for me?

268
00:14:34,632 --> 00:14:36,008
Step 3:

269
00:14:36,008 --> 00:14:38,512
Avoid contributing
to the distortion of facts.

270
00:14:39,173 --> 00:14:41,793
When you want to forward
information on social media,

271
00:14:42,046 --> 00:14:44,116
make sure you've read it,
you understand it,

272
00:14:44,271 --> 00:14:46,186
and avoid simplifying it in a way

273
00:14:46,186 --> 00:14:49,237
which is going to conform
with the views of the community.

274
00:14:49,237 --> 00:14:51,768
Try not to contribute
to an echo chamber effect

275
00:14:51,768 --> 00:14:54,596
within the community of views
you are participating in.

276
00:14:55,681 --> 00:15:00,181
If you follow these guidelines, 
you are going to do yourself a favor:

277
00:15:01,362 --> 00:15:04,949
you're going to stop building
a convenient alternative reality;

278
00:15:05,365 --> 00:15:09,057
you're going to avoid spreading 
half truths and distorted facts;

279
00:15:09,516 --> 00:15:15,231
and you will limit the self-enforcing 
groups of confirming exchanges,

280
00:15:15,573 --> 00:15:19,136
which are pushing people 
in different informational bubbles.

281
00:15:19,794 --> 00:15:22,914
You will help ideas 
to be questioned and challenged,

282
00:15:22,914 --> 00:15:26,576
and you will contribute to making
the public space an open space

283
00:15:26,576 --> 00:15:28,429
where the best ideas can win.

284
00:15:29,406 --> 00:15:32,434
Will you allow yourself 
to change your views

285
00:15:32,863 --> 00:15:34,647
and to abandon old ones?

286
00:15:35,892 --> 00:15:37,867
Smart people change their mind.

287
00:15:38,305 --> 00:15:39,594
Choose to be one.

288
00:15:40,885 --> 00:15:43,198
(Applause)