unSILOed with Greg LaBlanc

Innovation is a crucial part for organizations to stay ahead of their competitors, adapt to changing circumstances in the environment and create long-lasting businesses. Yet, many big corporations eventually stagnate and become obsolete while a lot of groundbreaking ideas come from small companies.Safi Bahcall is a second-generation physicist, a biotech entrepreneur, former public-company CEO and author of the highly acclaimed book “Loonshots: How to Nurture the Crazy Ideas That Win Wars, Cure Diseases, and Transform Industries”.Safi advises CEOs and leadership teams on strategy and innovation, and has delivered keynote presentations at industry conferences, investor events, leadership retreats, medical meetings, and leading academic institutions around the world.Greg and Safi discuss how organizations can borrow from science to implement systems and incentives that nurture innovation, risk-taking and experimenting which ultimately lead to radical breakthroughs.Episode Quotes:Having a chief incentive officer will help you grow your organizational scale49:29: You have a chief revenue officer whose role is strategic, given a marketing budget. How many dollars can we make? You have a chief technology officer whose role is strategic, given a fixed technology budget. How do we ensure the optimum technology use across the organization? Why don't you have a chief incentive officer? You have a fixed compensation. You try to stick within a fixed budget of cash and options. Why aren't you trying to have someone who's focused on maximizing the return that you get from that? It's pretty obvious. Which would you rather have, a force that has the latest smartphone gadgets or a force that's the most motivated in the industry? I'd rather have the latter.On increasing innovation10:38: If we want to increase innovation, risk-taking, and experimenting, we can't use the same systems. We have to use an opposite system, metrics, and rewards.Two helpful frameworks for every CEO08:19: It's a helpful framework to keep in mind if you're a CEO that addresses real-world topics or leading a group, or even managing a small team; you need to have two phases in your mind. One, we just need to deliver stuff on time, budget and spec consistently with quality to our customers. The other, we need to think of wild, crazy, new ideas on the one we're reducing risk on the one we're increasing risk. Show Links:Guest Profile:Safi Bahcall’s WebsiteSafi Bahcall on LinkedInSafi Bahcall on TwitterSafi Bahcall on YoutubeSafi Bahcall on FacebookHis Work:Loonshots: How to Nurture the Crazy Ideas That Win Wars, Cure Diseases, and Transform Industries Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In today’s world, corporate lobbying is everywhere. Corporations wield immense power over our economy and use their economic clout to influence policymakers, politicians and regulators in a way that can lead to corporate welfare and crony capitalism. Luigi Zingales is a finance professor at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business and the author of two widely-reviewed books, “Saving Capitalism from the Capitalists” and “A Capitalism for the People”. He is also a faculty research fellow for the National Bureau of Economic Research, the Center for Economic Policy Research, and a fellow of the European Governance Institute. He is also the director of the Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.Luigi Zingales' research interests span from corporate governance to financial development, from political economy to the economic effects of culture. He co-developed the Financial Trust Index, which is designed to monitor the level of trust that Americans have toward their financial system.Luigi and Greg talk about the problematic revolving door policy of politicians and lobbyists, why the conceptual distinction between being pro-market and pro-business has dissolved, and how we can practically enforce some kind of social norm around corporate lobbying.Episode Quotes:How could we enforce some social norms around corporate lobbying?46:51: My first step would be disclosure. Today, we know a little bit of the money that technically is registered as lobbying, but we don't know the donations. We don't know all the other ways in which companies spend our money. Okay. So the first one would really be some disclosure. The second is I think that these days we shame individuals for everything, even for not capitalizing the B in black, and I think that we should take a step back and focus on what is really important. Intellectual circles use groups and group dynamics to isolate dissenters. 32:15: Intellectual circles use groups and group dynamics to isolate dissenters. So, what you're trying to do is if you make a criticism that is dangerous, then you are immediately labeled something that is unacceptable. Is there any hope for the rescue of populism? 55:13: The biggest problem is that we don't talk to each other. And even if we don't understand each other, it is very rare to see two opponents having a spirited debate, because I'm not saying we should all agree. In fact, the fun is when we don't agree, but at least we agree to have the same set of rules and not to insult each other every three words.Show Links:Recommended Resources:Colin Mayer EpisodeGuest Profile:Faculty Profile at The University of ChicagoSpeaker’s Profile on HiCue SpeakersProfessional Profile on The Centre for Economic Policy ResearchLuigi Zingales on TwitterLuigi Zingales on LinkedInHis Work:Luigi Zingales on Google ScholarCapitalisn't PodcastA Capitalism for the People: Recapturing the Lost Genius of American ProsperitySaving Capitalism from the Capitalists: Unleashing the Power of Financial Markets to Create Wealth and Spread Opportunity Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

When it comes to nutrition, conventional wisdom suggeststhat we are at the mercy of an unhinged appetite and an addiction to calories. But as science shows, we're much smarter when it comes to eating than we previously thought.Mark Schatzker is an award-winning writer based in Toronto and author of such books as “The End of Craving, rediscovering, or Recovering the Lost Wisdom of Eating”. He is also a writer-in-residence at the Modern Diet and Physiology Research Center at Yale University, and a frequent contributor to The Globe and Mail (Toronto), Condé Nast Traveler, and Bloomberg Pursuits.Mark and Greg talk about regaining our body’s lost nutritional wisdom as the secret to a healthy diet and why the way food tastes is not some frivolous pleasure disconnected from nutrition but rather an essential part of how the brain understands food, and how it guides metabolism.Episode Quotes:The relationship between socioeconomic status and obesity44:48: There's a relationship between socioeconomic status and obesity. And right there, there's a material uncertainty in people's lives. And more interestingly, that connection becomes more solid when they look at actual food uncertainty when they look at whether people have difficulty paying the bills. Sometimes it looks irrational. People will think lower-income people, and it just seems so crazy. Why would you consume too much food? You can't afford it. You're giving yourself health problems. But it's a brain response that when there's times of scarcity, it's built-in by evolution, I should want more.How did we lose sight of the idea of homeostasis concerning food?27:50: Our brain is like a paranoid accountant. It is fixated on measurement and measures food as it comes in. That's what we experience as taste and aroma.Pleasure as a universal currency that drives human action17:43: The most interesting thing about pleasure is that he ( Michel Cabanac) described it as the kind of universal currency that drives human action. Whether it has to do with thirst, temperature, itchiness, all these things are driven by pleasure. It is the language through which all the body's needs and requirements are understood and mediated by the brain.Obesity is a disease of desire35:49 One of the most interesting things about obesity is that most people think it's an indulgence and pleasure that people with obesity lose themselves in the joy of eating. And neuroscience tells us this is, in fact, not true...(36:31)It is a disease of desire, of motivation, and this is what we see with reward prediction error with uncertainty, that you provoke a motivation response.Show Links:Recommended Resources:Michel CabanacMalcolm Gladwell Ted Talk “Choice, happiness and spaghetti sauce” Dana SmallsKent Berridge Guest Profile:Speaker’s Profile at Leigh Bureau Ltd.Mark Schatzker’s WebsiteMark Schatzker on LinkedInMark Schatzker on TwitterMark Schatzker on TEDxBostonHis Work:Articles on The AtlanticWorks on Condé Nast TravelerThe End of Craving - Recovering the Lost Wisdom of Eating Well The Dorito Effect: The Surprising New Truth About Food and Flavor Steak: One Man's Search for the World's Tastiest Piece of Beef Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

While wars and other violent conflicts dominate the news, it is easy to overlook that the majority of conflicts are actually resolved peacefully. In his highly acclaimed book “Why We Fight The Roots of War and The Paths to Peace”, author Chris Blattman draws on his expertise in economics, political science, and history to explain the five reasons why conflicts (rarely) turn violent and how to interrupt that deadly process.Chris Blattman is an economist and political scientist who uses field work and statistics to study poverty, political engagement, the causes and consequences of violence, and policy in developing countries. He is a professor at the Harris School of Public Policy at the University of Chicago.Greg and Chris discuss what can be learned from the commonalities and differences of conflicts of all levels, from interpersonal disputes to street gang violence to warring states and how peacemakers can avoid emotional and strategic mistakes to develop non-violent conflict solutions that last.Episode Quotes:There’s no 10-step plan for peace48:11: There's no 10-step plan for peace. I think there is a pretty simple set of ideas that can help us diagnose better, but then it's like being a doctor... (49:03) When we are asking our leaders to solve problems of development, change our cities, solve racism, or solve conflict, which is much more complex, we have this different set of expectations. We kind of want them to come to us and promise that Tylenol and radiation therapy are the answer and all we need is more of them, and all situations are alike. Tylenol and radiation therapy worked for that country, or this city, or that people. So it must work for us. And I don't know why we have that, why we accept that, and why we're like that in these two different spheres of life. And I think we just have this amazing ability to forget how hard and complex a problem is in a lot of social change.What makes a good mediation?12:37: Everything that helps resolve conflict or keep us from not breaking out into violence, which we avoid most of the time, is something that helps us pay attention to the costs and not go down one of these paths that made us choose this—the costly worst option, which is to try to bargain through bloodshed.Show Links:Recommended Resources:The Strategy of Conflict by Thomas SchellingAmong the Thugs by Bill BufordGuest Profile:Faculty Profile at the University of ChicagoProfessional Profile on Center for Global DevelopmentChris Blattman’s WebsiteChris Blatmman on LinkedInChris Blattman on FacebookHis Work:Chris Blattman on Google ScholarWhy We Fight: The Roots of War and the Paths to Peace Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Clinical psychologists like Todd Kashdan are in many ways the philosophers of our time, digging into what it is that makes for a fulfilling and happy and comfortable life.Awarded the 2013 Distinguished Early Career Researcher Award by the American Psychological Association, Todd Kashdan is among the world’s top experts on the psychology of well-being, psychological strengths, mental agility, and social relationships. As a Professor of Psychology at George Mason University, and a leading educator to the public, Todd translates state-of-the-art science for practical application to improve our everyday lives. He is well-known for his energetic and disarming communication style. Todd is the author of five books, including “Curious?”, “The Upside of Your Darkside,” and “Designing Positive Psychology.” In his latest book, “The Art of Insubordination,” Todd synthesizes decades of psychological research to show how we can improve the health of organizations and our society. He sits down with Greg in this episode to discuss the positive psychology movement, how people are getting happiness wrong, the benefits of boredom, and fostering a spirit of insubordination.Episode Quotes:Training yourself to be comfortable with discomfort28: 15: There's something really powerful about training yourself so that each moment during your day when you feel discomfort, you can sit with it, take another perspective, and do something with it as opposed to trying to escape it. Because this will make you a better human being to deal with other humans, with setbacks and difficulties in your life.Anxiety doesn't kill curiosity14:47: The only way you get curious is if you believe that you can handle the uncertainty that you don't know what the answer is going to be. And that doesn't mean you don't feel a sting if that person looks at you for a second, shakes their head, and walks away. So you still can experience rejection, but you're willing to take a step forward despite the presence of anxiety as part and parcel of what it means to be curious in the moment.Why people are defensive to new ideas19:18: If there is more power and potential for you as an individual to benefit from being receptive to someone, you have a leaning toward that person's ideas. And if someone's a dissenter and they can be pigeonholed as disagreeable or disgruntled, it's harder for them to make sure that they actually get a receptive audience for their message.Show Links:Recommended Resources:Daniel Berlin Paul SylviaNathan DeWall at University of KentuckyTwo Narcissists is Better Than One studyGuest Profile:Faculty Profile at George Mason UniversityProfessional Profile at Psychology TodayTodd Kashdan’s WebsiteTodd Kashdan LinkedInTodd Kashdan TwitterTodd Kashdan at TEDxUtrechtHis Work:Todd Kashdana on Google ScholarThe Well-Being LabThe Art of Insubordination: How to Dissent and Defy EffectivelyThe Upside of Your Dark Side: Why Being Your Whole Self--Not Just Your "Good" Self--Drives Success and FulfillmentMindfulness, Acceptance, and Positive Psychology: The Seven Foundations of Well-Being (The Context Press Mindfulness and Acceptance Practica Series) Curious?: Discover the Missing Ingredient to a Fulfilling LifeDesigning Positive Psychology: Taking Stock and Moving Forward (Series in Positive Psychology)  Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Recognized as a national thought leader in early language development, Dr. Dana Suskind has dedicated her research and clinical life to optimizing foundational brain development and preventing early cognitive disparities and their lifelong impact. She is founder and co-director of the TMW Center for Early Learning + Public Health, which aims to create a population-level shift in the knowledge and behavior of parents and caregivers to optimize the foundational brain development in children from birth to five years of age, particularly those born into poverty.Dana is a pediatric otolaryngologist who specializes in hearing loss and cochlear implantation. She currently directs the University of Chicago Medicine's Pediatric Hearing Loss and Cochlear Implant program and is an author of a couple books as well , including “Parent Nation: Unlocking Every Child's Potential Fulfilling Societies Promise,” and the controversial “Thirty Million Words: Building a Child’s Brain.”Dana joins Greg on this episode of unSILOed to talk about how we view parenting in the west, societal support, SIDS, how child rearing tips spread, and good vs. bad early childcare and education.Episode Quotes:How can companies make it easier for people to be both parents and employees?35:53: The first step is understanding that employees are also parents, and supporting them in both roles is actually good for the bottom line. And in terms of how to support parents, there are many different ways. In general, I think of them as flexibility, reliability, help with childcare, and just an acknowledgment that they are also parents.Parents and caregivers are the guardians of our society’s future13:49: One of the most important jobs is raising the next generation. Parents and caregivers, as I say, are the guardians of our society's future. The impact of poverty on children's development16:09: All children are born with their own individual promise. But for so many, that promise is ripped away because of the vacuum of support for families, et cetera. And one of the most insidious impacts of poverty is on the developing child.Show Links:Recommended Resources: Joan Luby, who wrote an article actually, who stated poverty's most insidious impact is on the developing brainGuest Profile:Professional Profile at The University of ChicagoSpeaker’s Profile at Penguin Random House Speakers BureauDana Suskind on LinkedInDana Suskind on TwitterDana Suskind on InstagramHer Work:Dana Suskind on Google ScholarParent Nation: Unlocking Every Child's Potential, Fulfilling Society's PromiseThirty Million Words: Building a Child's Brain Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

If exercise is so healthy, then why do many people dislike or avoid it? So much of our modern lives is sedentary, it’s more important than ever to get our bodies up and be active. Daniel Lieberman is a Professor in the Department of Human Evolutionary Biology, and the Edwin M. Lerner II Professor of Biological Sciences at Harvard University. He is also a member of the Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology. At Harvard, he teaches a variety of courses on human evolution, anatomy, and physiology, and has published several books including “The Evolution of the Human Head,” “The Story of the Human Body,” and “Exercised: Why Something We Never Evolved to Do is Healthy and Rewarding.”Daniel and Greg talk all about moving our human bodies today, including the evolution of running in humans, transitioning to the modern industrial world and its effects on us, and speed versus endurance.Episode Quotes:Developing lifelong habits through physical education48:29: We need to look outside the medical system to make these kinds of shifts. And it's a public health issue.It's really a political issue. It's an educational issue. It's a social issue. It's a corporate issue. And I think one of the places to focus on is schools, right? Because we also know that a lot of the habits people develop in college are the ones they keep for the rest of their life. And that's one of the reasons why universities, like mine and yours, really are doing an enormous disservice to their students by not promoting more physical education, because they're also missing out on this important window to help people develop lifelong habits.We evolve to be physically active for two reasons09:51: We evolve to be physically active for two reasons and two reasons only: one, it's necessary, and one, it's rewarding. How sports and play teaches human not to be reactively aggressive32:29: I think that one of the ways in which humans have evolved play and sport is to help teach skills for hunting and fighting and all the other things that are really important. Cause that's obviously a key element in playing in sports, but also to help teach humans not to be reactively aggressive. Show Links:Recommended Resources:Gerontologist at Stanford, James Fries - The extension of morbidity. The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined By Steven PinkerDr. Richard W. Wrangham Guest Profile:Professional Profile on Harvard UniversityHis Work:Daniel Lieberman on Google ScholarExercised: Why Something We Never Evolved to Do Is Healthy and RewardingThe Story of the Human Body: Evolution, Health, and DiseaseThe Evolution of the Human Head Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Martha Minow has taught at Harvard Law School since 1981, where her courses include civil procedure, constitutional law, fairness and privacy, family law, international criminal justice, jurisprudence, law and education, nonprofit organizations, and the public law workshop. An expert in human rights and advocacy for members of racial and religious minorities and for women, children, and persons with disabilities, she also writes and teaches about digital communications, democracy, privatization, military justice, and ethnic and religious conflict.She has written: “Saving the News: Why The Constitution Calls for Government Action to Preserve the Freedom of Speech,” “When Should Law Forgive?,” The First Global Prosecutor: Promise and Constraints,” “In Brown’s Wake: Legacies of America’s Constitutional Landmark,” and “Government by Contract.”Martha sits down with Greg to discuss bankruptcy laws & forgiveness in the US and restorative justice.Episode Quotes:A need for jurisprudence of forgiveness14:38: One of the contrasts between forgiveness and ordinary law is that law tries to be regular, predictable, have general rules announced in advance, and apply equally across people regardless of their circumstances. Forgiveness is the opposite of all of that, which is not to say that it's necessarily subject to abuse or inconsistency. So President Obama developed a set of rules and rubrics for when to give a pardon. It's very possible to develop something that looks more law-like when we talk about the exercise of forgiveness. And we need that. If you will, we need to develop a jurisprudence of forgiveness.Forgiveness does not call for forgetting25:11: It is striking that there are not just different words but different social practices associated with forgiveness and forgetting. To forgive is a process that has rituals, religious or otherwise. And it does not call for forgetting. It may be precisely to remember that forgiveness is possible.Letting go of justified resentment11:40: I don't think it's by accident that we use the word forgiveness in the context of debt, just as we do in the context of crime, as we do in the context of somebody bumping into someone else saying: Forgive me. These all fall under the general category of letting go of justified resentment. It's not forgiveness, if there isn't a justified resentment. There is a real violation. These are real. Forgiveness can, however, be built into not only human decency but also systems.Show Links:Recommended Resources:The Sweet Hereafter by Russell BanksGuest Profile:Faculty Profile at Harvard Law SchoolProfessional Profile at Boston University Center for Antiracist ResearchProfessional Profile at CarnegieMartha Minow at TEDHer Work:Saving the News: Why the Constitution Calls for Government Action to Preserve Freedom of Speech (Inalienable Rights) When Should Law Forgive?Making All the Difference: Inclusion, Exclusion, and American Law Breaking the Cycles of Hatred: Memory, Law, and RepairBetween Vengeance and Forgiveness: Facing History after Genocide and Mass Violence Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

How can you be both interdisciplinary and be a contributing specialist in your discipline in this day andage? It's a core theme of this podcast, as well as our guests' research. Diane Coyle is the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge. Diane co-directs the Bennett Institute where she heads research under the themes of progress and productivity. Her latest book is “Cogs and Monsters: What Economics Is, and What It Should Be” on how economics needs to change to keep pace with the twenty-first century and the digital economy.Diane is also a Director of the Productivity Institute, a Fellow of the Office for National Statistics, an expert adviser to the National Infrastructure Commission, and Senior Independent Member of the ESRC Council. Diane joins Greg to discuss the shifting dynamics of economic measurement’ over and underestimating GDP’ mathiess; and why the public has such a skewed perception of what economists do.Episode Quotes:Why is the public's perception of economists skewed?20:51: It's partly what they see on the news when they turn on the TV in the evening, and often it's somebody who works in the financial markets talking about the kinds of things that financial markets are trying to predict second by second. That's very dominant. I've done some work in schools over the years to try to encourage young women to go into economics because it's a very male-dominated profession. Both they and the boys in the class take away the idea that what economics is about is going to work on Wall Street or in the City here and making a lot of money. They think it's about money. And I think that's the dominant perception that people have. Money is a metric—we use it quite a lot. But it's not really what economics is about.Data are social contracts08:54: Data are not things that are given. They're things that are made—they’re social constructs.How do you identify what’s happening in a market?41:07: If you want to identify what's happening in a market, going and talking to people who participate in the market is a great way to find out about it. And you have megabytes of data. It's just text, and you can analyze that in a very systematic way. Diane's aspiration for economist30:08: I would like, as us economists, to pay more attention to other insights from other disciplines from people who think differently to ourselves, that basic intellectual hygiene thing of talking to people who disagree with you so that you understand why you might be wrong. But I suppose my ultimate dream is we manage to make economics consistent with the human sciences. Show Links:Recommended Resources:Scarcity: Why Having Too Little Means So Much - Book by Eldar ShafirBob Schillers book on narrativePaul RomerVegra Lickus (?) paper in 1994 in the American Economic Review ??Guest Profile:Faculty Profile at University of CambridgeProfessional Profile at Enlighten EconomicsDianne Coyle on TwitterDianne Coyle on LinkedInHer Work:Enlighten EconomicsDianne Coyle on Google ScholarCogs and Monsters: What Economics Is, and What It Should BeGDP: A Brief but Affectionate History - Revised and expanded EditionThe Economics of Enough: How to Run the Economy as If the Future Matters The Soulful Science: What Economists Really Do and Why It Matters - Revised EditionSex, Drugs and Economics: An Unconventional Introduction to EconomicsParadoxes of Prosperity: Why the New Capitalism Benefits All Governing the World Economy (Themes for the 21st Century) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

No one will accuse our next guest of doing philosophy in an isolated fashion. Julian Baggini is a writer and philosopher, and currently the Director of the Royal Institute of Philosophy. His latest book is titled “How the World Thinks: A Global History of Philosophy.” Julian is also the co-founder of The Philosophers' Magazine and has written for numerous international newspapers and magazines.  Julian and Greg discuss the legacy of Hume in this episode, while also diving into how someone can stay a generalist in the modern philosophy world, the scarcity of common sense and the sincerity of moral arguments.Episode Quotes:The most objective way of seeing the world33:16: The most objective way of seeing the world is purely through your own eyes, your own sort of words with reference to nothing else. Your view becomes more objective the more you can see the world in ways that can be shared with other people and perhaps ultimately with creatures that have very different perceptual apparatus to us and so forth.A little critical thinking is a dangerous thing09:22: People say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. A little critical thinking is a dangerous thing if you don't do it very well.Why is it that philosophers still disagree about everything?15:29: So you've only got two explanations:. One is that some people are more intelligent than others. Some philosophers simply are better philosophers than others. They've got the right answer and the people who disagree with them have got the wrong answer. Or that people of equal intelligence, knowledge, and skills and all these things can make different judgments about which way to jump on something. That's the uncomfortable but honest answer.Show Links:Recommended Resources:Sam Harris, Moral Landscape bookPatricia ChurchlandDavid HumeThomas Nagel, A View From Nowhere bookGuest Profile:Professional Profile at The GuardianSpeaker’s Profile at VBQ SpeakersJulian Baggini’s WebsiteJulian Baggini on LinkedInJulian Baggini on TwitterJulian Baggini on FacebookJulian Baggini at TEDxYouth@ManchesterHis Work:Julian Baggini on AeonThe Godless Gospel: Was Jesus A Great Moral Teacher?Babette's Feast (BFI Film Classics) Life: A User’s Manual: Philosophy for Every and Any Eventuality How the World Thinks: A Global History of PhilosophyA Short History of Truth: Consolations for a Post-Truth WorldHume on ReligionThe Edge of Reason: A Rational Skeptic in an Irrational World The Pig That Wants to Be Eaten: 100 Experiments for the Armchair Philosopher The Great Guide: What David Hume Can Teach Us about Being Human and Living Well Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.