Nov. 10, 2025
How Research Makes Your PR Pitch Stand Out
The player is loading ...
Ever wonder why some PR pitches get immediate attention while others languish in crowded inboxes? The secret might be in how you're using—or misusing—research data.
Nathan Richter of Wakefield Research pulls back the curtain on the powerful relationship between public relations and data research, revealing how these disciplines must work in concert rather than as separate functions. With experience on both sides of the equation, Richter speaks directly to the challenges PR professionals face when trying to make their stories stand out.
The conversation tackles a widespread problem in communications: the tendency to equate complexity with sophistication when presenting research. As Richter explains, "Many PR people, when they have data in hand, tend to be extremely excited and eager to publicize it... unfortunately, many equate complexity with sophistication or quality. Nothing could be further from the truth." In an environment where journalists face a barrage of pitches daily, clarity and credibility become your most valuable currency.
Perhaps most valuable is Richter's breakdown of the "broken process" most organizations use to develop research for public consumption. Rather than the common approach of brainstorming questions without clear intention, he advocates for a hypothesis-driven methodology that starts with desired outcomes. This approach triangulates what brands want to communicate, what media wants to hear, and what can actually be discovered through research—creating stories that truly resonate.
For PR professionals looking to elevate their media relations through research, this conversation offers practical guidance on building credibility, avoiding common pitfalls, and developing partnerships with research specialists who understand the unique demands of earned media. Whether you're pitching complex healthcare data or consumer trends, the principles remain the same: simplify, clarify, and validate your story with data that journalists can trust.
Take your PR strategy to the next level by understanding how research can transform from merely supporting content to becoming your strongest competitive advantage in a crowded media landscape.
Information on NEW podcast website.
Newsletter link:
https://www.publicrelationsreviewpodcast.com
Transcript
WEBVTT
00:01:39.519 --> 00:01:48.879
His approach is all about making research actionable for communications professionals and fails to breakthrough skepticism and that just filled file with steps.
00:01:48.879 --> 00:01:58.560
His insights are uniquely valuable, including how to design research that general journalists don't just cover, but they genuinely trust it.
00:01:58.560 --> 00:02:06.319
His background is in both public relations, and research allows him to speak the language of communicators at all levels.
00:02:06.319 --> 00:02:11.919
Now joining me today from Arlington, Virginia is Nathan Richter of Wakeville Research.
00:02:11.919 --> 00:02:13.919
Nathan, welcome to the podcast.
00:02:13.919 --> 00:02:26.560
Well, that's first of all, let's talk about how you merge the public relations and data research.
00:02:27.919 --> 00:02:29.039
Yeah, happy to.
00:02:29.039 --> 00:02:36.319
So uh most uh PR folks, when they're doing research, are uh tend to silo those two things.
00:02:36.319 --> 00:02:45.520
They think of PR as one function and research as another, but really they they work in concert with one another and they they must work in concert with one another.
00:02:45.520 --> 00:02:56.000
Um the way I like to think about it is this the the story you're pitching to media at the end of the day is uh it shares all the characteristics of of what makes media compelling, right?
00:02:56.000 --> 00:03:02.080
It's differentiated, it's new, um, hopefully if you're doing your job well, it's carrying brand messaging on behalf of your brand.
00:03:02.080 --> 00:03:04.639
Um and and that is the story.
00:03:04.639 --> 00:03:09.360
But what research does when used properly is it validates that story.
00:03:09.360 --> 00:03:16.800
And it gives media, particularly top-tier media or media that's facing uh you know a barrage of pitches every day.
00:03:16.800 --> 00:03:20.319
Uh anyone that's on that side of it knows what that can be like.
00:03:20.319 --> 00:03:25.360
Um it gives them a way to identify your pitch as being better than the others.
00:03:25.360 --> 00:03:28.400
Um so these things have to work in concert.
00:03:29.280 --> 00:03:45.120
So basically what I hear you're saying is that by adding the uh statistical data in there, it it gives you uh it it how would I put it, uh sets you above the rest, so to speak, because you begin uh providing a more comprehensive story to them.
00:03:46.719 --> 00:03:47.360
Absolutely.
00:03:47.360 --> 00:03:55.199
You know, if we think about what makes stories compelling generally, we know the list, and I just reviewed some of that there, right?
00:03:55.199 --> 00:04:06.000
Um but there are additional considerations for for survey-based pitches, and there are some very uh easy traps that PR professionals tend to fall into.
00:04:06.000 --> 00:04:14.719
And keeping in mind that I've I've worked for an agency PR, I've done political communications as well, even before um approaching it from the research perspective.
00:04:14.719 --> 00:04:16.079
So I've lived this a little bit.
00:04:16.079 --> 00:04:19.120
I I empathize with with your with many of your listeners.
00:04:19.120 --> 00:04:23.279
Um, but there are um areas that that become problematic.
00:04:23.279 --> 00:04:36.639
So one is a lot of PR people, when they have data in hand, they tend to be extremely excited and eager to publicize that because it is a something of a relief to have something real and credible to pitch.
00:04:36.639 --> 00:04:45.839
A lot of PR pitches, we've all been there, are tend to be things that we kind of cooked up ourselves with our colleagues and and perhaps with our clients.
00:04:45.839 --> 00:04:51.199
And there's things that we're sort of using our credibility as an agency to say, oh, this is a real thing.
00:04:51.199 --> 00:04:56.240
But data allows you to kind of convey that credibility through a third party.
00:04:56.240 --> 00:04:57.920
And that's wonderful.
00:04:57.920 --> 00:05:06.160
Unfortunately, many PR people in that environment equate complexity with sophistication or complexity with quality.
00:05:06.160 --> 00:05:15.279
And really nothing could be further from the truth because in earned media relations, Peter, you know the story must be clear, it must be concise, it has to be easy to convey.
00:05:15.279 --> 00:05:23.120
And so if we aren't doing that, and if we're using data to sort of uh confuse and overwhelm, then it's not doing its job.
00:05:23.120 --> 00:05:32.720
But if it's complementing the story, if it's validating the story, now you're differentiating your pitch from everyone else's, and you're not making up your pitch, you're you're sharing insights.
00:05:33.519 --> 00:05:42.399
You know, I think you maybe just answered my uh next question would be how do you how can PR teams convert data into meaningful stories that journalists will actually use?
00:05:42.399 --> 00:05:45.040
And I think you began to uh you know touch on that.
00:05:45.040 --> 00:05:50.000
Uh so if if there are any way that you can expand on that, uh that part would be helpful as well.
00:05:50.000 --> 00:05:51.120
Happy to.
00:05:51.759 --> 00:05:52.959
Yeah, no, happy to.
00:05:52.959 --> 00:06:10.000
I mean, I I would say that the the process by which most people, whether they're in public relations or they're working in in research, the process by which they develop research for public release and thought leadership is is broken for many people.
00:06:10.000 --> 00:06:28.639
Um most agencies, uh most research firms even, tend to uh through one means or another, uh maybe in a group project or maybe over email or maybe even as a solo operator, they tend to throw a bunch of questions into a document and then they hopefully work with a research provider to essentially clean it up.
00:06:28.639 --> 00:06:31.439
And I'm asked that all the time from clients, you know, we need this cleaned up.
00:06:31.439 --> 00:06:34.240
What that means is a technical review.
00:06:34.240 --> 00:06:43.519
And what that produces is a uh kind of uh you know, kind of pray and spray approach where you're asking a bunch of questions but without intention.
00:06:43.519 --> 00:07:02.000
And so when it comes time to translate the data that you ultimately return from that process into a credible pitch and into a good story, now you're putting together a Franken story, you're sort of cobbling together uh your your data points, and you're wishing you would ask this, and you're wishing you would ask this something differently.
00:07:02.000 --> 00:07:04.319
Um it's it's a really broken process.
00:07:04.319 --> 00:07:12.319
And so the way that you use this process on behalf of brands is to take a hypothesis-driven approach.
00:07:12.319 --> 00:07:23.519
Um, the the the the chief delineation is this the former approach, the broken way, is people come up with questions, but with a hypothesis-driven approach, it's the answers that matter.
00:07:23.519 --> 00:07:25.360
What helps tell our story?
00:07:25.360 --> 00:07:26.560
Is it new?
00:07:26.560 --> 00:07:31.680
And then if we ask a fair question, is that thing discoverable?
00:07:31.680 --> 00:07:41.759
And so in that way, we're connecting what the brand wants to say, which uh to my PR friends out there is a tough job because often what the brand wants to say is not news.
00:07:41.759 --> 00:07:50.399
Um, you're combining that with what the media wants to hear, and then triangulating that with, well, what is actually discoverable in research?
00:07:50.399 --> 00:08:04.720
And that is a very difficult thing to do, but by assessing the media landscape, by assessing the research landscape, um, by by kind of applying the skills of our various trades, um, you can produce really compelling database survey pitches.
00:08:04.720 --> 00:08:07.439
So it's a little bit of science and and a little bit of magic too.
00:08:08.639 --> 00:08:12.240
So I think you're beginning to also uh let me just ask this question then.
00:08:12.240 --> 00:08:17.839
How can PRCF build credibility as both data provider and reliable communicator?
00:08:17.839 --> 00:08:20.480
And I think you began to touch on that as well.
00:08:21.279 --> 00:08:22.000
A hundred percent.
00:08:22.000 --> 00:08:33.519
You know, what when when I was on um your side of the ball, uh, you know, in strictly your earned media uh PR, uh credibility was um the currency of the realm, and and I'd like to think it remains so.
00:08:33.519 --> 00:08:44.879
Um, particularly these days, an environment where for anyone pushing earned content, the media landscape has, of course, been contracting for what do you think, Peter, you know, 20 years.
00:08:44.879 --> 00:08:50.080
But now the number of editors and producers within the remaining outlets is contracting as well.
00:08:50.080 --> 00:08:59.440
And so there's there's to maintain credibility uh is so important because if you don't, you are going to burn a relationship.
00:08:59.440 --> 00:09:08.799
That is particularly true if you are pushing survey data that was collected uh incorrectly or analyzed incorrectly.
00:09:08.799 --> 00:09:19.600
And it's never been a more dangerous time for PR agencies and PR professionals to uh sort of DIY this this kind of tactic.
00:09:19.600 --> 00:09:40.399
Um there are a number of pop-up shops out there, there's all kinds of kind of do-it-yourself options, and um to me, you are in you are inviting, and I see this all the time, you are inviting chaos because when pitching top-tier media, they're going to be looking for things within the data that um that convey that credibility.
00:09:40.399 --> 00:09:49.039
Um these are things like setting representative points against an audience, making sure questions are asked properly, making sure the data is reported out properly.
00:09:49.039 --> 00:09:56.639
And you know, it's very, very difficult for a lot of PR folks, given all the other things that they're managing, to do that.
00:09:56.639 --> 00:09:59.840
This is a essentially a specialty, right?
00:09:59.840 --> 00:10:05.120
Um I think it's very similar to sort of you know DIY home improvement projects.
00:10:05.120 --> 00:10:10.559
You know, I would often say this that you could attempt it, um, you might succeed.
00:10:10.559 --> 00:10:15.840
Chances are you're going to spend more time, more money, and you may even hurt yourself in the process.
00:10:15.840 --> 00:10:22.399
Um, and in the case of PR, you may hurt your brand by pushing out something that is less than credible.
00:10:22.399 --> 00:10:32.480
Um, that the the lasting impact of that is so uh much less than um than the maybe saving a few dollars by doing it yourself.
00:10:32.480 --> 00:10:39.919
So credibility matters both in in in the ideas, of course, but also how we validate those ideas through the research.
00:10:42.159 --> 00:10:51.600
Now the the other thing as I listen to you, as you said, you know, getting uh PR people to the point that they can comfortably present this information.
00:10:51.600 --> 00:11:06.879
Uh do you recommend that they do it collaborate with uh, you know, who will they collaborate as they're a data person, bring them in for the first couple of trials to make sure that so they can gain their own comfort level rather than okay, here's what the researcher gave me and then present it.
00:11:06.879 --> 00:11:17.039
The problem with that to me is that if I walk in SLSA naked, I'm just gonna read to you what we present it and other questions come up I can't answer, that could be uh a a big issue.
00:11:19.120 --> 00:11:20.320
Yeah, exactly right.
00:11:20.320 --> 00:11:37.600
So something that we really um emphasize here at Wake Wakefield Research is by working with us, you will learn a lot about research and you will become uh a better PR practitioner and a and and someone who is better able to wield research.
00:11:37.600 --> 00:11:40.799
Um but have that doesn't make you a researcher.
00:11:40.799 --> 00:11:57.279
Um so making sure that you're working with someone uh that can um that can represent the research, that can answer questions from media on how it was conducted, um, that can uh make sure that you're presenting things correctly is really crucial.
00:11:57.279 --> 00:12:16.080
And and something we do here, and we do this at no cost, and this isn't an advertisement for us, but it's sort of a good uh illustration of what you're talking about, is we review our partners' press materials for data accuracy if they like, it's an option, uh, before they go out to media or before they go out to their client or whoever they're sending it to.
00:12:16.080 --> 00:12:29.919
And the reason we do that is, of course, to be helpful, but also because it is so easy to um to change a word or to misread a statistic and present something that is inaccurate or that is not uh accurate enough.
00:12:29.919 --> 00:12:34.720
And when we are doing research with a partner, our brand is attached to it too.
00:12:34.720 --> 00:12:39.679
In fact, that's a large part of what makes it mediable, is knowing it is conducted with a credible organization.
00:12:39.679 --> 00:12:42.320
So we are all in the same boat together.
00:12:42.320 --> 00:12:47.919
So we really emphasize providing that backstopping um ability.
00:12:47.919 --> 00:12:56.159
Um it's something that uh I think um you know most folks uh when they are sourcing a provider don't really think about.
00:12:56.159 --> 00:13:09.120
But it matters a great deal when you are when you have an opportunity with a really important um media outlet or when there's maybe an issue with something you've presented, or a perceived issue, which is often the case.
00:13:09.120 --> 00:13:11.679
There's often sort of a question, a driving question.
00:13:11.679 --> 00:13:23.679
You want to have a team in your corner that is um accomplished in the in in research and that is accustomed to talking to media, and I think that understands the stakes of talking with media.
00:13:23.679 --> 00:13:29.120
Um that is you know, that's the difference between sort of weing it and and really having a team uh behind you.
00:13:29.919 --> 00:13:47.679
Now, are there areas, uh when I say areas, I mean let's say retail and maybe educational health, that data from those particular areas and others uh are some much more difficult to explain to people who aren't familiar with hearing it in in their uh particular areas?
00:13:48.639 --> 00:14:03.600
You know, well, there there's there are certainly sectors that are more likely to invite um complex ideas or stories that require more knowledge, um, you know, industry knowledge or knowledge about a given audience than others.
00:14:03.600 --> 00:14:08.480
And you know, we we we run the gamut here, and and a lot of your listeners I'm sure do too as well.
00:14:08.480 --> 00:14:19.039
We you know, working with uh a pharma company that is exploring opinions amongst a specific patient population or a specific provider population, doing that work globally.
00:14:19.039 --> 00:14:40.879
You know, we work in 96 countries, so doing that work in Europe, for example, where there are real um kind of uh constraints on on what can be communicated and how data is collected, um, that that is certainly more complex than um another category of surveys we like, you know, the the the goofy holiday surveys that people tend to do, or the relationship, you know, the kind of the soft news kind of consumer packaging relationship stuff.
00:14:40.879 --> 00:14:42.720
So there are differences there.
00:14:42.720 --> 00:14:53.919
But whether you're talking about a comp a complex patient population or whether you're talking about sort of you know what what your dad wants for Christmas, um the rules of the game are the same.
00:14:53.919 --> 00:14:59.679
You have to simplify, it has to be um clear and concise and and easy to convey.
00:14:59.679 --> 00:15:07.120
And as I've said before, a lot of PR professionals, when they get data, they try to pitch complex analysis.
00:15:07.120 --> 00:15:20.559
And this is made worse by research providers that they might be contracting with, or even researchers in their own agencies that that don't understand, really understand PR and what it's like to pitch PR in an earned media environment.
00:15:20.559 --> 00:15:26.720
And the the research industry is notorious for hiding behind complexity, right?
00:15:26.720 --> 00:15:32.159
I'm I'm a wizard in a tower doing a you know a dark magic that you don't understand, trust me, it's fine.
00:15:32.159 --> 00:15:40.159
That is not how research should feel, but but that's just because most researchers are not communicators and it's such an unforced error.
00:15:40.159 --> 00:16:02.720
Um so we regardless of the issue, the questions should be elegant and simple and easy to understand and easy to report out, even if the knowledge required to know if a question is interesting or how to properly report that out is complex and requires sort of a deep well of experience, the tool itself should be very, very clean and very easy to use.
00:16:04.000 --> 00:16:09.840
Now, uh in terms of uh the data of the collection, do you collaborate with your clients?
00:16:09.840 --> 00:16:15.759
Do they give you the target, uh market, if you will, or audience that they'd like to get the data from?
00:16:16.720 --> 00:16:17.519
Sometimes.
00:16:17.519 --> 00:16:33.919
So um on occasion, um you know uh we have folks come to us with with you know a specific audience, and after discussing with them what they hope to learn or what they hope the story they hope to tell, or the media they hope to bring that to, we'll we we have no private object.
00:16:33.919 --> 00:16:36.000
We have an audience that's right.
00:16:36.000 --> 00:16:46.080
Usually, as often, uh, we're looking for um diplomatic ways to steer them in a more productive uh direction.
00:16:46.080 --> 00:17:00.559
And you know, one of the things that we try to emphasize here, and one of the ways your your your listeners can improve their research, is really thinking about um the the sort of the story they want to tell and where and to who they want to tell it.
00:17:00.559 --> 00:17:08.079
Because oftentimes we see one of the mistakes we see our partners make at in in the early stages is they're really focused on audience.
00:17:08.079 --> 00:17:16.319
They'll say, and this is more demand gen, which is obviously intersecting with with PR, but they'll say, our customer is this certain type of executive.
00:17:16.319 --> 00:17:23.039
And it may be the case that a survey amongst that executive is exactly the right story to tell based on their objectives.
00:17:23.039 --> 00:17:40.559
But as often it's not, because perhaps what that executive, that buyer uh needs to hear is they need to see data from their customers or they need to see data from people that are more uh that that are less senior in their organization, and that's what it would actually appeal to them.
00:17:40.559 --> 00:17:44.559
And so we want to begin with what media are we bringing this to?
00:17:44.559 --> 00:17:48.079
What other types of public uh communications are we engaging in?
00:17:48.079 --> 00:17:49.680
Is there a sales component here?
00:17:49.680 --> 00:17:55.359
Um specifically, what editors or features are you hoping, or producers are you hoping to pitch?
00:17:55.359 --> 00:17:56.880
And then working backwards from that.
00:17:56.880 --> 00:17:59.440
And so it does become a bit of a chicken and egg.
00:17:59.440 --> 00:18:05.839
Um ultimately you're better off, I guess with the chickens and the end result, you're better off starting with the chickens and the egg.
00:18:05.839 --> 00:18:08.240
But we have to start with the egg too.
00:18:09.039 --> 00:18:26.400
You know what what I'm getting from this is that uh there has to be a very in-depth and uh a lot of specificity when you have meetings as to what uh uh folks would like to get from this research so that they can be accurate in delivering the information and uh to to their uh their uh uh clients.
00:18:28.319 --> 00:18:29.119
Absolutely.
00:18:29.119 --> 00:18:31.200
Um it that that has several benefits.
00:18:31.200 --> 00:18:39.039
First, it has a the practical benefit of having um uh uh sort of a monetary uh benefit.
00:18:39.039 --> 00:18:46.319
And what I mean by that is that oftentimes there's a solution that's not only better, but that costs less.
00:18:46.319 --> 00:18:55.599
And that's something that a good research provider, if they understand PR and they understand earned media communications, should be able to discuss with you.
00:18:55.599 --> 00:19:13.839
Um there um there are uh uh you know other benefits here as well, because a lot of what we do and a lot of what your listeners are likely doing is we're constantly educating the sponsors, the brand, the people writing the checks at the end of the day, educating them about PR, and in this case, how to use research for PR.
00:19:13.839 --> 00:19:25.440
And so the more conversations we have up front about who are your media targets, what are the applications of the data, what is your timing, realistically, if you can share it, what is your budget?
00:19:25.440 --> 00:19:37.920
These things allow us then to look at the constellation of variables in front of us and to really organize those into a picture that meets objectives and satisfies the realistic and real-world requirements of time and money.
00:19:37.920 --> 00:19:51.200
And so there's a mistake I think a lot of uh organizations make, um, and a lot of folks in communications make, which is they they've only gone so far as to say, well, we want to survey, we want to survey moms on holiday purchases.
00:19:51.200 --> 00:19:52.559
Fine, we can do that.
00:19:52.559 --> 00:19:54.240
We get that instruction all the time.
00:19:54.240 --> 00:20:10.240
But we are far better served as a group, as a group of people working towards a goal if we can have a really in-depth conversation about, well, well, who are your targets and what are the things that have worked well for brand before, and what are the things you pitched them in uh up to now that uh that they've been excited about?
00:20:10.240 --> 00:20:13.119
And by the way, how quickly do you need this and what's the budget?
00:20:13.119 --> 00:20:15.279
And and really thinking about all those characteristics.
00:20:15.279 --> 00:20:21.759
You know, you wouldn't set out for a cross-country trip just by saying, well, let's get to California, just point west and start walking.
00:20:21.759 --> 00:20:34.799
You would have to think about transportation and food and how you're gonna get there and the route you're gonna take and the weather, and and and in real-world project management, which ultimately you will not be able to avoid, uh, those things really matter.
00:20:35.440 --> 00:21:00.640
So basically what I'm hearing about this is that that there really needs to be a lot of specificity and uh a clear understanding of uh an agency, a PR agency, knowing exactly what it is they need to get researched on, uh the depth of it, the width of it, and uh all the other things that might be involved in making making helping them to make or helping the clients to make decisions about uh certain things that they're looking for.
00:21:02.000 --> 00:21:03.839
Yes, it's it's a it's a good start.
00:21:03.839 --> 00:21:19.680
I would I would add a little a little color, a little nuance to that by saying that the exercise of thinking through that um as you engage with a research provider will put you in a better position to be helped by a good and knowledgeable research provider because you have already thought critically about it.
00:21:19.680 --> 00:21:29.039
We we don't, and I and I imagine most wouldn't, require anyone to have fully uh conceived and and kind of baked the entire program.
00:21:29.039 --> 00:21:34.640
Um you know, we the work that we do here, we're we're writing questions for people, we're ideating, we'll come from concepts.
00:21:34.640 --> 00:21:51.119
Um so we're doing a lot of that heavy lifting, but having the understanding of what are the KPIs and what are the expectations and what does this need to do on a on a practical and on a strategic level is a really great place from which to build an even more intelligent program or more even intelligent tactic.
00:21:52.960 --> 00:21:57.039
Well, Nathan, uh, you provided an awful lot of information for our listeners.
00:21:57.039 --> 00:22:05.200
Anything that you think we miss uh in terms of uh uh having uh data folks and PR folks working together?
00:22:06.000 --> 00:22:10.960
Uh well I well first I'd like to say thank you for your your questions, and it's been really, really fun to talk with you.
00:22:10.960 --> 00:22:31.839
Um and I think your your question phrasing itself is um is really excellent because it is about working together and working with your if you're if you find a knowledgeable research provider, someone you trust, bringing them into the fold and and coordinating, collaborating with them to meet your objective is the right approach.
00:22:31.839 --> 00:22:36.880
It's a mistake to think of your of any provider as sort of just a vendor.
00:22:36.880 --> 00:22:45.200
And I know that's a very uh vendor-y thing to say, um, but uh but it is the truth because our job is to work as a consultant.
00:22:45.200 --> 00:23:02.720
You know, we do work 50 to Fortune 100, we do work in 96 countries, and I think really importantly, we work with every large and medium and small agency you can possibly think of, many of whom have their own internal research capabilities, um, in part because there is value in working with a with a specialist in this area.
00:23:02.720 --> 00:23:12.559
And so I would say be honest about your needs, be honest about your constraints, and look to find someone in the research role who can be that partner to you.
00:23:12.559 --> 00:23:33.519
Um, and then if I can just make a small secondary pitch for your listeners to really think about the value of being hypothesis-driven and thinking about outcomes before you get too tied up in uh the right methodology or the right audience characteristics, sort of what do we hope the data will do for us and when do we hope it will do it for us?
00:23:33.519 --> 00:23:35.359
Those are really important considerations.
00:23:36.319 --> 00:23:42.400
Well, Nathan, let me say thank you so very, very much for uh being our guest on the Public Relations Review podcast today.
00:23:42.400 --> 00:23:46.480
I'm sure that our audience will benefit tremendously from information.
00:01:39.519 --> 00:01:48.879
00:01:48.879 --> 00:01:58.560
00:01:58.560 --> 00:02:06.319
00:02:06.319 --> 00:02:11.919
00:02:11.919 --> 00:02:13.919
00:02:13.919 --> 00:02:26.560
00:02:27.919 --> 00:02:29.039
00:02:29.039 --> 00:02:36.319
00:02:36.319 --> 00:02:45.520
00:02:45.520 --> 00:02:56.000
00:02:56.000 --> 00:03:02.080
00:03:02.080 --> 00:03:04.639
00:03:04.639 --> 00:03:09.360
00:03:09.360 --> 00:03:16.800
00:03:16.800 --> 00:03:20.319
00:03:20.319 --> 00:03:25.360
00:03:25.360 --> 00:03:28.400
00:03:29.280 --> 00:03:45.120
00:03:46.719 --> 00:03:47.360
00:03:47.360 --> 00:03:55.199
00:03:55.199 --> 00:04:06.000
00:04:06.000 --> 00:04:14.719
00:04:14.719 --> 00:04:16.079
00:04:16.079 --> 00:04:19.120
00:04:19.120 --> 00:04:23.279
00:04:23.279 --> 00:04:36.639
00:04:36.639 --> 00:04:45.839
00:04:45.839 --> 00:04:51.199
00:04:51.199 --> 00:04:56.240
00:04:56.240 --> 00:04:57.920
00:04:57.920 --> 00:05:06.160
00:05:06.160 --> 00:05:15.279
00:05:15.279 --> 00:05:23.120
00:05:23.120 --> 00:05:32.720
00:05:33.519 --> 00:05:42.399
00:05:42.399 --> 00:05:45.040
00:05:45.040 --> 00:05:50.000
00:05:50.000 --> 00:05:51.120
00:05:51.759 --> 00:05:52.959
00:05:52.959 --> 00:06:10.000
00:06:10.000 --> 00:06:28.639
00:06:28.639 --> 00:06:31.439
00:06:31.439 --> 00:06:34.240
00:06:34.240 --> 00:06:43.519
00:06:43.519 --> 00:07:02.000
00:07:02.000 --> 00:07:04.319
00:07:04.319 --> 00:07:12.319
00:07:12.319 --> 00:07:23.519
00:07:23.519 --> 00:07:25.360
00:07:25.360 --> 00:07:26.560
00:07:26.560 --> 00:07:31.680
00:07:31.680 --> 00:07:41.759
00:07:41.759 --> 00:07:50.399
00:07:50.399 --> 00:08:04.720
00:08:04.720 --> 00:08:07.439
00:08:08.639 --> 00:08:12.240
00:08:12.240 --> 00:08:17.839
00:08:17.839 --> 00:08:20.480
00:08:21.279 --> 00:08:22.000
00:08:22.000 --> 00:08:33.519
00:08:33.519 --> 00:08:44.879
00:08:44.879 --> 00:08:50.080
00:08:50.080 --> 00:08:59.440
00:08:59.440 --> 00:09:08.799
00:09:08.799 --> 00:09:19.600
00:09:19.600 --> 00:09:40.399
00:09:40.399 --> 00:09:49.039
00:09:49.039 --> 00:09:56.639
00:09:56.639 --> 00:09:59.840
00:09:59.840 --> 00:10:05.120
00:10:05.120 --> 00:10:10.559
00:10:10.559 --> 00:10:15.840
00:10:15.840 --> 00:10:22.399
00:10:22.399 --> 00:10:32.480
00:10:32.480 --> 00:10:39.919
00:10:42.159 --> 00:10:51.600
00:10:51.600 --> 00:11:06.879
00:11:06.879 --> 00:11:17.039
00:11:19.120 --> 00:11:20.320
00:11:20.320 --> 00:11:37.600
00:11:37.600 --> 00:11:40.799
00:11:40.799 --> 00:11:57.279
00:11:57.279 --> 00:12:16.080
00:12:16.080 --> 00:12:29.919
00:12:29.919 --> 00:12:34.720
00:12:34.720 --> 00:12:39.679
00:12:39.679 --> 00:12:42.320
00:12:42.320 --> 00:12:47.919
00:12:47.919 --> 00:12:56.159
00:12:56.159 --> 00:13:09.120
00:13:09.120 --> 00:13:11.679
00:13:11.679 --> 00:13:23.679
00:13:23.679 --> 00:13:29.120
00:13:29.919 --> 00:13:47.679
00:13:48.639 --> 00:14:03.600
00:14:03.600 --> 00:14:08.480
00:14:08.480 --> 00:14:19.039
00:14:19.039 --> 00:14:40.879
00:14:40.879 --> 00:14:42.720
00:14:42.720 --> 00:14:53.919
00:14:53.919 --> 00:14:59.679
00:14:59.679 --> 00:15:07.120
00:15:07.120 --> 00:15:20.559
00:15:20.559 --> 00:15:26.720
00:15:26.720 --> 00:15:32.159
00:15:32.159 --> 00:15:40.159
00:15:40.159 --> 00:16:02.720
00:16:04.000 --> 00:16:09.840
00:16:09.840 --> 00:16:15.759
00:16:16.720 --> 00:16:17.519
00:16:17.519 --> 00:16:33.919
00:16:33.919 --> 00:16:36.000
00:16:36.000 --> 00:16:46.080
00:16:46.080 --> 00:17:00.559
00:17:00.559 --> 00:17:08.079
00:17:08.079 --> 00:17:16.319
00:17:16.319 --> 00:17:23.039
00:17:23.039 --> 00:17:40.559
00:17:40.559 --> 00:17:44.559
00:17:44.559 --> 00:17:48.079
00:17:48.079 --> 00:17:49.680
00:17:49.680 --> 00:17:55.359
00:17:55.359 --> 00:17:56.880
00:17:56.880 --> 00:17:59.440
00:17:59.440 --> 00:18:05.839
00:18:05.839 --> 00:18:08.240
00:18:09.039 --> 00:18:26.400
00:18:28.319 --> 00:18:29.119
00:18:29.119 --> 00:18:31.200
00:18:31.200 --> 00:18:39.039
00:18:39.039 --> 00:18:46.319
00:18:46.319 --> 00:18:55.599
00:18:55.599 --> 00:19:13.839
00:19:13.839 --> 00:19:25.440
00:19:25.440 --> 00:19:37.920
00:19:37.920 --> 00:19:51.200
00:19:51.200 --> 00:19:52.559
00:19:52.559 --> 00:19:54.240
00:19:54.240 --> 00:20:10.240
00:20:10.240 --> 00:20:13.119
00:20:13.119 --> 00:20:15.279
00:20:15.279 --> 00:20:21.759
00:20:21.759 --> 00:20:34.799
00:20:35.440 --> 00:21:00.640
00:21:02.000 --> 00:21:03.839
00:21:03.839 --> 00:21:19.680
00:21:19.680 --> 00:21:29.039
00:21:29.039 --> 00:21:34.640
00:21:34.640 --> 00:21:51.119
00:21:52.960 --> 00:21:57.039
00:21:57.039 --> 00:22:05.200
00:22:06.000 --> 00:22:10.960
00:22:10.960 --> 00:22:31.839
00:22:31.839 --> 00:22:36.880
00:22:36.880 --> 00:22:45.200
00:22:45.200 --> 00:23:02.720
00:23:02.720 --> 00:23:12.559
00:23:12.559 --> 00:23:33.519
00:23:33.519 --> 00:23:35.359
00:23:36.319 --> 00:23:42.400
00:23:42.400 --> 00:23:46.480
