I mentioned knowledge gap hypothesis, which essentially argued that as knowledge and information flows into a community, the information or knowledge is acquired at a faster rate by those from higher socioeconomic status compared to those from a lower socioeconomic status. As a result of which, the knowledge gap between them widens. Now, there were a number of factors identified by them, which either exacerbate those gaps or bridge them. Early on, I published a number of papers in that area. But over time, my thinking has evolved and expanded as I moved into health, starting with the Minnesota Heart Health Program, working with John Finnegan. Subsequently, I realized that knowledge is necessary most of the time, but not always sufficient, because the opportunity structure to act on that knowledge may or may not exist for certain groups. As I began looking at it, I felt compelled to expand the definition from knowledge to larger issues of communication resources: access to information, as well as ability to act on it. That's when I evolved into developing this framework called communication inequalities. In essence, what we are arguing is that communication inequalities are manifest in two broad ways. These are differences between social groups in producing, processing, and disseminating knowledge and communication resources. Those inequalities are experienced between different groups. They also manifest individually as differences in accessing, processing, and ability to act on information among individuals and groups. So one example, if you take a large organization with a multi-billion dollar industry, like the tobacco industry, and you take a small organization, which is fighting that big tobacco industry, differences in resources between those two groups become very clear when you're talking about communication inequalities. In the United States, the tobacco industry spends roughly $10 billion in marketing tobacco. You take all the state's organizations that are in the business of tobacco control, like those of us, they don't have $10 billion. Tobacco industry: what is it marketing? Think about it for a second. It is really marketing distortion of information. That is an inequality between the tobacco industry and the tobacco control groups. So the last point I want to say on it is when people in the area of public health introduce this idea of social determinants framework. The idea of social determinants framework is that inequalities in health outcomes, are contributed by social conditions and social inequalities. The so-called social determinants, such as race, ethnicity, class, geography, caste, tribe, and the differences in resource structures among these different groups cause these unequal health outcomes. But the mechanisms were always a point of contention and question: how does that happen? My team came in and argued one way to explain that is through communication inequalities. We argued and demonstrated through a series of studies and papers that social determinants of health are what I call social drivers of inequalities. They contribute to inequalities and communication, which in turn, contribute to inequalities in health outcomes. So if you can bridge inequalities in communication, that is one addressable social determinant that could potentially bridge inequalities in health outcomes. So that is the framework that we have been pushing. What it showed for me is a pathway where I'm doing that empirical inquiry, collecting data, but the questions I am asking are informed by my values, about equity about justice.