The Chosen One

23:44The sort of, the star penis, the first penis I see, is also the star penis that I saw on the general penis page. Right. And I guess I'm curious about the history of this image, the owner of this image. What can we know about this penis that I'm looking at? There's a few things to say about this penis. We can deconstruct this. So I'll give you some information and you can make what you want of it. It's all ponderous. I'm not going to draw your conclusions. You draw your own conclusions. So there was a Wikipedia article on penis, 2001. That was one of the first ones. Some years later, it was decided there should be an article on human penis, separate from animal penises in general.

24:23And there was always discussion about which penis should be used as an illustration. And the picture that you're talking about, so at the top of human penis, there's a particular penis. This is considered the lead image, and it's the most valuable real estate in any Wikipedia article. What is the first picture people see? Because there's a lot of people that come to a Wikipedia article, They get quick answers. They see the thing and then they leave. So this is the penis that represents humanity's penis. It's very high traffic article. This is one of the most popular Wikipedia articles. It's always been one of the most popular Wikipedia articles.

24:57This is the most popular penis in the world. More people have seen this penis than any other penis in the world. This penis, the penis I'm looking at is the most seen penis in the entire world. This might be the most important penis ever in terms of like how it's influenced the way people think about penises. Sorry, and is it possible to know how many people have seen this penis? Let's see. I'd have to do the calculation, but say like three million times every year since 2012. So, you know, 30, 40 million times. So this penis has been viewed something like 30 or 40 million times. Yeah. That's a lot of times.

25:35Yeah. So you'd be hard-pressed to find like another single penis viewed that many times. By such a large segment of humanity around the world. So the listener who had emailed us, part of what they were asking is they said they were becoming sexually educated in the early 2000s with the launch of Wikipedia. And they said they got their information about sex from Wikipedia. This was, I think, a formative penis for them. And for them, they're like, oh, their sense of the range of what a normal penis might look like came from looking at images on Wikipedia. Like Wikipedia anatomy pages had made up just his baseline understanding of the human body.

26:14Like this had been his sex ed, or at least, I mean, I'm sure he got sexual education other places, but this was his sort of primary source. Okay, so Wikipedia is a very popular information source for education and general informative purposes on gender and sexuality. So it's been long discussed and long recognized since mid-2000s in the scholarly literature and really since the start of Wikipedia that people come to Wikipedia and they look up articles on anatomy and sex and sex positions, sexual orientations and sexually transmitted infections, sexual health, dating, marriage, relationships, and kink.

27:02So all of these are definitely in the top most popular Wikipedia articles. This is true globally, and this has always been the case. So all of these are very popular. And what we've been talking about with penis, these things are contested in every single one of those articles in the same way. And how does Wikipedia as a culture think about the responsibility of being a primary sex ed resource for humanity? It's a mixed response. So I'll tell you some of the stakeholders. So it happens that I organize with Weak Media LGBT, which is the community of weak comedians who are interested in LGBT content.

27:46And it's not that LGBT people have a monopoly over sex or sexuality. However, there's something inherently sexual about an LGBT status and people ask LGBT people about sexuality anyway. And the LGBT community, it tends to be more involved in articles on anatomy or sexual health, gender, relationships, these kinds of things. I'm also involved with another Wikimedia community. It's called Wikimedia Medicine. So these are a lot of people who participate in particularly public health communication, the kind of health issues that if a person who's not medically trained has information, then they can use that to inform their decisions about their sexual health.

28:32And by having that information, they have better health outcomes. yeah so sexual health it's not just something that a person goes to the doctor and the doctor fixes actually there's certain behaviors about sexual health that if you have information you're going to be a healthier person and if you don't have information you're more likely to get a sexually transmitted infection so there's a lot of medical people who who edit these things from a medical perspective bring those in some other groups the wiki women's groups for different reasons, they're more involved in sexual health just in the course of advocating for protection of women in Wikipedia.

29:07So those are three groups that I would identify that's particularly interested. Is there another Wikipedia page like the penis one in terms of popularity, attention? Like, is there another Wikipedia page that like pulses with this energy? Yes. So as a transition, let me mention a kind of penis that's requested in the human penis article that's not there that is also a hot topic. So what penises are missing? And if you talk to a Wikipedian, they could give you lots of critique. Like if we had 10 hours, we could talk for 10 hours about this stuff. I understand the nature of this. And if anybody wants to, you can contact other Wikipedians and get other opinions.

29:45Every Wikipedian is prepared to do an interview like this. But if you go into the talk page archives, one requested penis is people say, Can I see a transgender girl penis? And what they mean by that is they want to see a full-body nude transgender girl that has breasts and has a penis. That's the kind of penis that is being requested. And why is that penis not on the Wikipedia penis page? Because it's a minority penis. Because it's not representative enough. So even though it's a hot topic politically, transgender rights is a hot topic politically, it's actually not such a common anatomical situation.

30:23things could change or it could become more prominent. Wikipedia lags a bit behind because it's informationally conservative. So we look at the sources, we look at the academic literature, we look at the textbooks, we ask experts, what information do people need? And also it's not exactly focused on a penis. You can describe this kind of thing without showing a penis and breast in the same pictures. Like there's, that's getting to the point of sexualizing or eroticizing and that's not what we want for this article. But how do you decide? So I understand the first part of the view, which is to say we have to discriminate in terms of which penises we're going to show.

31:01And so not discrimination in the prejudicial sense, but our sort of cut here will be how statistically in the real world represented are these penises. And that's going to be the bouquet of penises that you see. And while there are trans women with penises in the world, Certainly, statistically speaking, in America, there's not as many. And so we're not going to show it. That's part of the argument. Am I understanding it right? Everything is correct there except the in the America part. So remember that Wikipedia is global. It's not just very popular in the United States. It's also popular globally.

31:35And many people speak English as a second language. So even if there's another language Wikipedia version that they could be using, their local language, many people prefer to use English Wikipedia just because it's more developed. But it's global. People from all over the world are seeing this. So it's not about just trans representation in the United States. It's global. It says that international trans representation. Yeah. But wouldn't there also—and I'm not—I have no dog in this fight. But it surprises me only because I would think that part of what it would also be driven by is just curiosity.

32:07It seems like some of the decision-making behind the penis page is driven by curiosity. So part of me is surprised that if this is something people are curious about, that that wouldn't be a reason to display it. So about the curiosity. You've heard of this phenomenon, the Wikipedia rabbit hole. People start at one article, they click through, and they set us by their curiosity, jumping Wikipedia article to Wikipedia article through the hyperlinks, and they find the content that they want. I've spent some time in them. Right. Right. Guess what? If somebody wants to see a transgender girl's penis, it is possible for them to click enough times and find one of those in the Wikimedia ecosystem.

32:43I see. This is just literally whether it's on the page for Human Penis. Right. And you were asking, are there comparable philosophical discussions elsewhere? And could I direct you to any Wikipedia article about transgender issues?

33:03Right. That's a place where you see also a very lively talk page. Right.

33:11Remember, the reason we were here at all, talking about any of this, is because of a question asked by our listener, Leon. Leon, who many years ago had gotten his sexual education from Wikipedia as a young gay kid, and who suspected as an adult that he wasn't alone in that experience. Leon had wanted to peek into the minds of the many authors who'd first explained sex to him. He'd also wanted to know about this one specific penis and its owner, a topic I promise we'll return to. But for a moment, here's what had snagged my attention. How seriously Lane and his fellow Wikipedians took their jobs as de facto sex ed teachers to the world.

33:48Not just to people like young Leon, to people everywhere, who approached the site sometimes from very different cultural starting points. So I know from Wikimedia Medicine that we've had people go to different public health agencies in different countries around the world and say, you could use Wikipedia to improve outcomes in your population, share Wikipedia content instead of writing it from fresh or reinventing the general reference information that Wikipedia has. Why don't you reuse Wikipedia's information? And in doing this, we've heard from public health professionals in different countries, we meaning more westernized.

34:26It just happens that way. So Western people tend to have a first mover advantage in Wikipedia in many ways. Some other countries have said, we'd like to share your health information. Could you please remove information on family planning or contraceptives? Oh, interesting. And that's been kind of abrasive to, say, editors in the United States that had this conversation in the context of the women's rights movement some decades ago, but not every country and culture has had a conversation about birth control pills or family planning or the woman's place in deciding these things in the way that, say, the United States has had these things.

35:05And it's not that we want to be colonial or force anybody. The different language versions present a version of Wikipedia that's appropriate for their culture, but at the same time, we do want people to have access to information if the editors of that local language version choose to include it. It's so strange to think like 25 years ago, somebody just thought, I can put an encyclopedia on the internet. And then the level of cultural sensitivity and thoughtfulness you end up needing to arrive at a quarter of a century later is just like surprisingly dense. There's a lot of things to discover.

35:40And it's still difficult in every country, In every culture, it's still difficult to talk about sexuality, sexual education. So people have said, can you turn off the images of penises in the Wikipedia article? What if a child comes or a minor comes to Wikipedia? Should you age restrict Wikipedia? And this is a major political development around the world. Should access to websites be age restricted? The major social media platforms are putting age restrictions. There's different kinds of regulations on this. And the Wikimedia community's perspective is that we want everyone in the world to be able to access Wikipedia.

36:14We want everyone in the world to be able to read Wikipedia. There's nothing obscene in Wikipedia. And we don't want to have barriers or logins for people to access this information. So Wikipedia's perspective for now is the site would prefer not to AgeGate because it goes against the ethos of what this open reference material is supposed to be. Yes, and also there's discussions about what should be age-gated. So there's some interest that would say you need to age-gate family planning and contraceptive information. That's obscenity. And there's some people who say you need to age-gate any information about being queer or sexual orientation because some sexual orientations are prohibited in a country or culture.

36:56Very common. Actually, I think that there's just my read of the situation, and I'm doing my best to read the spirit of the world. But I think there's actually more cultures that would be interested in Wikipedia educating the article on queer than the article on penis. Censorship is a recurring topic when Wikipedians get together. It's not just censorship about sexuality. It's about every single war in the world. So Wikipedians are persecuted in every single country and all kinds of topics, some of the kinds of persecution. If you edit Wikipedian articles on sexuality, people will harass you. I've experienced harassment for this.

37:31Many people in Wikimedia LGBT and Wikimedia Medicine, they can talk about this. Any Wikipedian who edits a Wikipedian article about a politician, particularly a politician scandal, whatever the country and the world, there's going to be a certain amount of danger associated with that. There's Wikipedians in prison right now for editing Wikipedia articles. Where? I've got a colleague. His name is Osama Khalid. He is in Saudi Arabia. You can read about him on Wikipedia. So he came to our conferences. He is a physician. He translated Wikipedia articles from English into Arabic language. he came to WikiLGBT and he said, what can I do to help you?

38:13And we said, can you help translate the article on HIV and AIDS? And it's not that he had a particular involvement with WikiMediaLGBT, but he was a physician going to help where he could. He was a medical student at the time. He finished medical school. He got married. He had a kid. He is arrested. And there's public information about this. There's other examples. So you can look at the Wikipedia article on a Wikipedians imprisoned or arrested or harassed for editing Wikipedia. There's a lot of stories of this because a lot of people who do this, they don't realize the danger that they're getting into.

38:51These people are not activists or trying to stand out or trying to make a point. They're just sharing general reference information and citing reliable sources, not trying to be edgy. And this happens to them.

39:05I know this is a somewhat grim place to find ourselves in a story about the internet's most famous penis. But I will say, as someone who's marveled from far away about Wikipedia's continued existence, talking to someone inside of it, thinking about how hard people there work to keep it running, even sometimes at the cost of their own freedom, it makes me feel, this is weird, almost patriotic for the internet. Or for what it can sometimes be. So much of what I see online just feels like an absolute feast of evidence for nihilists. And yet, here's one place where anonymous strangers volunteer their time, where many ponderous conversations lead to a free, infinite library.

39:43A minor miracle. I digress. We're going to take a short break. When we return, we will leave the wonder and anguish of the Internet's information workers and go find out what we can about the emperor who wears no clothes.

40:13Thank you.

40:34by Smile Generation. Did you know your dentist might spot health issues before your doctor does? It's true. I used to think the mouth was just a standalone island containing teeth, but it turns out what happens in the mouth doesn't stay in the mouth. It actually impacts your heart, your brain, and your overall health. Smile Generation takes a whole body approach to care because oral health issues are linked to long-term conditions like heart disease, diabetes, and Alzheimer's. Caring for your smile is really about caring for your whole self, and there's a unique kind of confidence that comes from playing the long game and being proactive.

41:08Regular dental exams and screenings can help detect potential health concerns early, sometimes before you even notice symptoms. Smile Generation's trusted dentists focus on modern patient-focused care that helps you unlock a new level of confidence so your health never holds you back. To learn more about the connection between oral health and overall health, visit smilegeneration.com slash search. Visit smilegeneration.com slash search to learn more about the mouth-body connection and find a trusted provider near you.

41:38This episode of Search Engine is brought to you in part by Notability. Back to school season always brings a flood of new tech tools, but Notability's newest release actually delivers on its promise. Their new feature, Learn, acts like an instant study assistant by turning your typed or handwritten notes into flashcards, practice quizzes, and organized study guides instantly. It eliminates the hassle of copying information back and forth between different study apps, making it a favorite for students juggling packed schedules and parents investing in their education. But here's what makes this announcement special.

42:09Notability is offering a real guarantee. If you use Learn throughout this semester and decide it didn't help you study, they'll cover the cost for the rest of your semester. And you rarely see a company stand behind their features like this, which makes this the ideal time to test it out and streamline your routine. Try Learn, Guarantee, and Notability today by going to notability.com slash learn dash guarantee and use code search25 at checkout to get 25 % off. This episode of Search Engine is brought to you in part by Rosetta Stone Sapphire. There's nothing quite like the rush of successfully speaking another language and actually being understood by a native speaker.

42:45Rosetta Stone just made reaching that milestone a whole lot easier with Rosetta Stone Sapphire, their biggest app launch in over a decade. They've taken their renowned research-backed method and added cutting-edge features to make learning feel effortless. You learn completely in your new language using audio and visuals, making the experience intuitive, immersive, and genuinely fun. They've introduced chat missions, which turns real-world conversation practice into an interactive game. You get placed in everyday scenarios like checking into a hotel or making plans with a friend, and get instant feedback to sharpen your skills before you put them to use in the real world.

43:18If you want to take your language skills to the next level, don't wait to try Rosetta Stone Sapphire. Search Engine listeners can get 20 % off their Rosetta Stone Sapphire subscription when they sign up today. This gets you access to Rosetta Stone Sapphire in 25 languages. Visit rosettastone.com slash search engine to redeem your 20 % off. That's rosettastone.com slash search engine.

43:50Welcome back to the show. Enough with all the learning about stuff. Let's talk about the penis that brought us to Lane's door. And so what can we know about the owner of this image, who I'm assuming, but I'm not certain, is the owner of this penis? Sure. So you're not the first person to ask this question. There's other journalists that have asked the question and got answers in other kinds of ways. But I'll give you the perspective from what we know about the Wikipedia metadata and our editorial process. So every time someone makes an edit to Wikipedia or uploads an image to Wikimedia Commons.

44:22They have a Wikimedia account. We can examine that account. So it's public information. You don't need to be logged in. Anyone can examine these things. So the person who uploaded this picture of their penis, or a penis, presume it's the uploader. This penis is the only thing that they've ever uploaded. So somebody created a Wikipedia account. They uploaded a picture. And this is not normal behavior. Most people who come to Wikipedia, if they're going to upload pictures, they upload a few pictures. or if they're going to make edits, they do a few edits. So this person in 2012, they rocked up. They said, here's my penis.

44:55I'm out of here. Yes. Their one contribution, at least under this account, to the entire corpus of Wikimedia was a picture of probably their penis. You could go beyond Wikipedia. Like, I really doubt this person has ever done anything with such a societal impact bigger than this. It's not just the biggest thing they've done in Wikipedia. who does something with greater impact than this. It's not common. And can we know anything about their intentions? Did they leave any trace on the talk page? Did they say anything about what they meant by doing this? What is the meaning of this? Yeah. So them alone, we don't have other information about the person.

45:39They uploaded their penis. They left. They haven't been back. And they haven't engaged them in Wikipedia. They haven't engaged in Wikimedia comments. They just haven't done anything since. But something else that I could tell you is that they're not the only person who's done this. Actually, there's quite a lot of people who've come to Wikipedia, uploaded a picture of a penis, and then left. What do you mean? Like, have they been competitors to be the hero shot on the page? Or have they just said, I would like to add this image of this penis to Wikipedia? Like I said, I'm a data scientist, and I'd like, I wish that I had the computational power to look at this in general.

46:17Like, how many people come to Wikipedia and go to the zoo and they upload a picture of an elephant and that's the only thing they do and they leave? Yeah. Like, what are the trends of when somebody comes to Wikipedia, does one thing and then leaves forever? It's actually, I don't think it's so common, but with penis, it's a thing that people do. Like, people will do this with penis. They won't do it with, say, historical buildings in their community wherever they live in the world. I went back after we spoke to the talk section of the Wikipedia page for the human penis just to see this battle for supremacy myself.

46:47It's less like looking at a long discussion, more like mainlining 900 seasons of Game of Thrones, as different powers rise and fall over the years, each attempting to climb the Iron Throne. I wasn't the first journalist to survey this contest. A writer named Brian Van Hooker had written the definitive chronology of the battle for a short-lived online magazine called Mel a few years before. The Wikipedia penis page itself is born on November 8th, 2001, two months after the worst domestic terror attack in American history. A moment of aching national grief in which, nevertheless, the quotidian parts of life continued, including one day that fall when a user added a penis page to Wikipedia.

47:29Perhaps in a nod to the mood of solemnity, they did not include on that page an actual image of a penis. For the first couple years, that spirit of prudishness reigned. When images were added, they were removed, sometimes within minutes. Then, in the summer of 2003, the wall was for the first time ever breached. A user uploaded a set of simple, black-and-white, medical-looking penis photos. And for whatever reason, the moderators let them stay. But those penises lived further down the page, in the details section, competing for attention in a collage. The top of the page, the headline spot, stayed empty until 2004, when it was claimed not by a man, but by a drawing.

48:09A simple, encyclopedic medical diagram. For years, actual humans competed for that spot. Penises were submitted for consideration as a lead image, and the moderators patrolling the page rejected them, one after another. Bouncers at the world's most popular library. Not tonight. The penises submitted were often labeled with the worst insult Wikipedia can offer. The penises were called un-encyclopedic. Van Hooker, the writer, recounts the story of a user named Bob who kept insisting, kept trying the door. Not apparently with just his own penis, but with a kind of coterie of different penis images.

48:49Bob believed in his heart that the lead image on the penis page should be of an actual penis, not a diagram. So he'd upload and be rejected. Upload and be rejected. For over a year, Bob fought. Summer 2008, he fights the other mods to a draw. The diagram comes down, a photograph goes up, but the moderators churlishly refuse to use any of Bob's penises. Instead, it's this blurry black-and-white photo with labels. It looks like the rushed photo someone would have snapped of Bigfoot's penis. Bob won the battle, but surveying the result, it's hard to say it was worth it. February 2010, a new claimant arrives.

49:27A user posts a photo from someone named Polarstern, apparently from Germany, whose penis image, possibly his own, is of a white person's penis with a shock of unkempt blonde pubic hair, a Targaryen. His full-color photograph unseats the black and white one, and now Polarstern sits at the throne. Later that year, the kingdom actually faces a schism. The penis page splits in two, a general penis entry, which is handed over to the animals, whale penises and jars and elephant, as well as a new human penis page, where Polarstern carries his crown across the border and reigns for about two years. But there's a problem, and the moderators know it.

50:06The most famous, most viewed image of a human penis on Earth is Caucasian. White people, internationally, are a minority. Why should a white man's penis represent everyone? In April 2012, an answer arrives. A user uploads a new image. Uncircumcised, darker skin tone, racially ambiguous. A penis, the argument goes, that could belong to almost any race. And where past successions had taken months of warfare, This one takes a single day. The moderators reach consensus almost immediately, which is how the reign of a user named Coast One begins, the epoch we still live in. Coast One's penis mounts the Iron Throne on April 30th, 2012, where it has stayed ever since.

50:51Pretenders have a beard over the years, to throwing him for a few hours here, a few minutes there, but every usurper is swiftly removed, the king restored. His reign is now well into its second decade, Although, if you look at what's happened in the world since the relative tranquility of April 2012, I would posit that we ought to have some questions for our monarch. However, he's anonymous. We can't ask him anything. I ask Elaine to tell me what a veteran Wikipedian notices when contemplating this chosen penis. Okay. First, let's consider the technical quality of the photograph. So when someone uploads images to Wikimedia Commons, we evaluate these from a photographic perspective.

51:36What is the subject matter? What does it focus on? What is the resolution of the image? What's the native size of it? Is this good photography? Is this good modeling? Is this good lighting? Is the picture clear? And this is not a good photo. This is not somebody in a modeling studio. So the lighting is bad. The resolution is low. So this is not a technically good photograph and not the kind of thing that Wikipedia would normally want at the lead of an article, especially one that gets so much traffic as this one. Regarding the subject matter, so this person is racially ambiguous, which is fine, and it's not determinate.

52:16So we only have the penis in this picture. This is not a crop of a larger photo where the model showed their full nude body or their face. They just uploaded their penis. and that's all the information we have. It's a flaccid penis. It is not erect. It's not a penis in action. It's not peeing. It's not ejaculating. It's not doing anything. It's not wearing any jewelry. It happens to be shaven, which is a matter of controversy because some people say you should show a natural penis. There's a lot of talk, editorial talk, on the talk page of this article about the extent to which the penises in the article are representative of humanity in general.

52:55You mean there are people on the talk page who would say that if we have a, say, like, large longitudinal survey that says that 72 % of men have unshaven genitals, then the penis that people see when they go to the Wikipedia page should be an unshaven penis? That sort of is the idea? The criteria is uncertain, but you're thinking in the correct way. Somehow or another, people want the platonic ideal of a penis. Huh. Hmm. so it should be a and the platonic ideal of a penis like none of us can we're all looking at shadows of penises on walls of caves but like the idea is that it should be unglamorous sort of average sized like not bejeweled like it should be like like in my mind sometimes I go to saunas like yes and I'll see penises at saunas this looks like a sauna penis like it just looks like a regular part of a regular body so so generally we want high technical performance with the photography but maybe that's not the way people usually see pictures of penises maybe like the typical picture of a penis is really something that someone just pulls out their phone and takes a picture of and that's the penis a grainy furtive shot of a grainy furtive body part yes huh yes you're thinking like a wikipedia editor it's all very philosophical Yes.

54:24Lane Raspberry, Wikimedian in residence at the University of Virginia. He has been editing the site, which survives on reader donations, since 2004. Thank you for talking about all of this and so thoughtfully. Thank you. Thanks for having me, PJ. Before we end this episode, one important fact-checking note in the spirit of virtuous ponderousness. Piper Dumont, who fact-checked our show this week, raised an issue. Are we sure that the Wikipedia penis is the most viewed actual penis in all of human history? It's certainly one of the top two, but the other contender would have to be the penis of the singer Ray J, co-star of Kim Kardashian's sex tape, most viewed sex tape in all of human history.

55:07It gets tricky. The penis Wikipedia page we know has been viewed many, many millions of times, but we know the current penis was not there for all of those views. Our best estimate is that this specific penis has probably been viewed tens of millions of times, possibly more. Kim Kardashian's video has supposedly been viewed hundreds of millions of times, but that number comes from the company that sells it. It's pirated on lots of different streaming sites, and obviously not every person watches the whole thing. So it's confounding. Of course, there's also images of the Statue David, but we're not counting that because it's a marble statue, not an image of a real human penis.

55:43None of this undermines the spirit of the question. This is an extraordinarily important penis image for all the reasons we discussed today. But Search Engine is committed to honesty about what can be known and which facts we have to hold with requisite uncertainty.

56:16Search Engine is a presentation of Odyssey. It was created by me, PJ Vogt, and Truthy Pinnamaneni. Garrett Graham is our senior producer. Emily Maltaire is our associate producer. Our production intern is Piper Dumont, who also fact-checked this week's episode. Theme, original composition, and mixing by Armin Bazarian. Also, some special thanks this week. Thanks to Meg Zwacha and Robin Kanner for helping us find Lane. And Robin, congratulations on your bottom surgery. I just had to feel free to mention that because the timing seemed appropriately funny. Also, special thanks to Sam Krieger, who graced us with an office visit.

56:48Our executive producer is Leah Reese Dennis. Thanks to the rest of the team at Odyssey, Rob Mirandy, Craig Cox, Eric Donnelly, Colin Gaynor-Moore, Curran, Josephina Francis, Kirk Courtney, Vanessa Tincotti, and Hilary Schuff. If you have a business and would like to advertise on Search Engine, please send us an email, pjvote85 at gmail.com, subject line, advertising. If you have a question for the show, that is also the place to send in your questions. We are always looking for more questions. If you're a listener and would like to never hear an ad on the show, you can sign up for Incognito Mode.

57:18It's our paid feed. It is what funds the show and keeps us going, along with ads. You also get bonus episodes. You can find information about Incognito Mode at searchengine.show. Thank you, as always, for listening. We will see you very soon.

57:38Thank you.