and it is on. we have always taken that stance and it is important. notjust for us but for and it is important. notjust for us but forjournalism as a whole. if we had but forjournalism as a whole. if we bad back but forjournalism as a whole. if we had back down, it would have been catastrophic across the industry. it was uncomfortable and i was lucky that as was uncomfortable and i was lucky that as an was uncomfortable and i was lucky that as an organisation and this is important. that as an organisation and this is important, we are large and well funded important, we are large and well funded and we are in a position to take legal funded and we are in a position to take legal advice. i was given some le-al take legal advice. i was given some legal representation and we were able to legal representation and we were able to go to court and present an argument able to go to court and present an argument as to why we should not and the judge argument as to why we should
automation because you can t employ a lot of people to check everything all the time. so along with other media companies, they are trying, they are playing catch up, they are trying to scramble to get what is regarded as bad content off and of course that is subjective, but bad content, inaccurate content off their platform. but content, inaccurate content off their platform. content, inaccurate content off their platform. but if they are as ou sa , their platform. but if they are as you say. they their platform. but if they are as you say, they have their platform. but if they are as you say, they have made - their platform. but if they are as you say, they have made this i you say, they have made this podcaster exclusively, they are moving direction, they are notjust a streaming platform, in that case, are they guided by the same responsibilities that other broadcasters are?- responsibilities that other broadcasters are? that is an interesting broadcasters are? that is an int