Given a document, find the main entity about whom the author is writing. Write the full name if mentioned in the text. Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link].

[Q]: ''If  Orrin Hatch  came in third place in the Iowa caucuses  that would be bigger news that George Bush winning '' said James Camp  Mr. Hatch's national political director. ''The headlines would not be that Bush wins  but that  Hatch  takes third.''
 Even Mr. Hatch  said  his  goal was to ''do fourth or better.''
To that end  the Hatch campaign is heavily depending on local newspaper interviews and small-town radio call-in and television talk shows to spread  his  word  since there is no cost.
Speaking  talk-show style  on the same level as the audience rather than from the stage  Mr. Hatch attacked his opponents. ''How many of those people have the experience  yes  the knowledge and the ability to work with Congress and really fulfill all those campaign promises?'' Mr. Hatch asked. ''I understand Congress to the last person. I passed 43 bills in the last Congress. Sure  I can't get everything passed  but  Orrin Hatch  will die trying.''
 He  also said the Democrats in the race  Vice President Al Gore and former Senator Bill Bradley  were ''far left  and you better understand that.''
It was difficult to tell if  Mr. Hatch  won any converts. Jack Croft said that while he liked what  Mr. Hatch  said on ''our need for more military readiness ''  he  was not swayed enough to vote for  him .
David Holzinger  who said  he  was trying to decide between  Mr. Hatch  and Mr. Forbes  said: ''I came because  he 's a giant in the Senate. I like what  he  said on the ethics of the Clinton administration.''
[A]: Orrin Hatch


[Q]: * * * France isn’t the first killjoy to quit the smartphone party. In 2015  the Canadian artist Garnet Hertz invented a cheeky device called “Phonesafe ” a masochistic lockbox designed to incarcerate smartphones for a set period of time. Hertz meant Phonesafe as a provocation  but the same idea quickly became a product. Today  you can buy similar  but mass-produced  containers on Amazon  and multi-phone lockers have become a mainstay in corporate offices and schools around the world. A McDonald’s in Singapore has even installed a locker designed to promote “family togetherness” and face-to-face conversation. If you attend a Guns n’ Roses concert or a comedy performance by Dave Chappelle  ushers will require you to lock your device in a neoprene pouch and take it into the show in that state.  The phone-locking pouch  made by a San Francisco company called Yondr   has a wide opening at the short end for inserting a smartphone. A magnetic locking mechanism  similar to those on anti-theft tags in retail stores  engages to hold it closed. After the show  this clasp is swiped across a counter-magnet  which releases the lock.  Yondr  is a surefire way to cut down on bootleg YouTube videos. In Wired  Alice Gregory recently took a tough look at the device. Gregory recounts her experience at a Chris Rock performance  where audience members waiting in the lobby had to forgo smartphone usage. The affair reduced them to “a roomful of jonesing fiends ” as she puts it. Ultimately  Gregory connects  Yondr  to a thorny question about civil liberties: the right of the people to keep and bear smartphones.
It’s an ironic conclusion  because  Yondr  is sold as a tool to provide freedom  rather than to take it away. To “Be Here Now ” as the company’s tagline puts it. It’s a promise to deliver presence—a tricky calling  to say the least. Presence has a long history in religion and philosophy  from Buddhist practices to the metaphysics of the 20th-century philosopher Martin Heidegger. Today  presence is most common in the various mindfulness trends that have overtaken individual and corporate life  in Silicon Valley in particular—collectively the critic R. John Williams has called them “technê-zen.” Cutting through the history and the rhetoric  it’s productive to think about presence in terms of attention. You’re present where you focus your attention—and you only have so much attention to pay. In the case of Chris Rock  he wants attention directed toward him  live on stage. Rock’s show might involve awkward improvisation or new material that he doesn't want circulated online. Teachers are less concerned about copyright than comedians are  but they still demand attention. I have tested Yondr’s effects on mind-wandering in classroom experiments with Dan Smilek of the University of Waterloo Vision and Attention Lab. Our research is based in part on the assumption that instructors want students to focus on the course materials  and not on Instagram  Facebook  or other distractions.  Yondr  can be a remarkably effective tool for enforcing digital abstinence in these contexts  thanks primarily to  its  portability. Rather than locking away devices inside lockers  or even inside a disused Catholic tabernacle  as I have done in a performance piece   Yondr  buffers the anxiety of being isolated from your device.
Given that the mere presence of one’s smartphone can reduce cognitive capacity   Yondr  offers a way to surf between the waves of a device’s presence and absence. You can hold it  but you can’t use it. This might be an especially important balance in classroom situations  where students see a teacher’s “phone shoebox” as an unwelcome imposition of authority. * * * Needless to say   Yondr  is still an imposition. And controlling attention requires more than just locking a device in a binge-breaking neoprene pouch. Joelle Renstrom has reported the results of her own  Yondr  experiment in a class at Boston University  where she had her 30 students lock away their devices over the course of a semester. At first  37 percent of the students found the policy annoying  but by the end of the term that figure had dropped to 14 percent. Those are promising  if tentative  results  but Renstrom’s anecdotal comments about the experiment may be more instructive than the data she collected. Renstrom describes her students’ initial experience of Yondr as “akin to caging a pet  a clear denial of freedom.” Moreover  she observes that some students left their cases unlocked as a sign of rebellion  even though they didn’t remove the phones from them. Rather than becoming “active resistors to technology ” as the scholars Christine Satchell and Paul Dourish call people who choose to ignore their devices   Yondr  users are ultimately the victims of technological disenfranchisement. When implemented as a mandatory smartphone prophylactic   Yondr  becomes a means of control  not of choice  let alone of presence.
Such top-down tactics might be enforced easily at live performances  as one of my research assistants observed firsthand at a Chris Rock show in Niagara Falls. However  as a daily ritual for high-school students  all-or-nothing digital abstinence enforced by an authority figure seems destined to backfire  possibly leading to rejection—or even worse  a legal complaint. In an attempt to tackle this disciplinary problem  I have been offering workshops to schoolteachers that riff on and revise the design Yondr originated. In the workshops  I provide a kit that allows students to make their own digital abstinence case  but with an obnoxiously loud Velcro enclosure rather than a silent  magnetic clasp. This semipermeable design—the Resistor Case  I call it—is intended to promote self-regulation  not authoritarian control. The Velcro acts as a gateway to conscience: It provides just enough resistance and noise to make its owner think twice before opening it. Michael I. Norton  Daniel Mochon  and Dan Ariely coined the “IKEA effect” to name the increase in value people assign to self-made products. With the Resistor Case  I’m counting on a similar effect  that students who fist construct and then choose to make use of their DIY phone lockers might be more compelled to use them. Of course  the kit will only work if the teacher provides a context for it that includes a discussion of responsible smartphone use. (The kit provides a series of cards to prompt this conversation.)
[A]: Yondr


[Q]: Best drama: Did . . . did . . . did the Redskins leave the Seahawks too much time? Almost! Seattle drove to the Washington 38-yard line and had time for a Hail Mary after Russell Wilson was ruled down by contact on a play that was initially ruled an incomplete pass with four seconds remaining. Wilsonâs desperation heave bounced off a pair of hands in the back of the end zone before falling harmlessly incomplete. The Redskins would escape with one of their most unlikely wins in some time.
Best fourth-quarter quarterbacks:  Wilson  was dreadful for much of the game  a credit to Washingtonâs defense  but  he  was masterful with the game on the line.  Wilson  capped Seattleâs 71-yard  go-ahead touchdown drive with a 30-yard pass to Doug Baldwin at the 1:34 mark  and finished 24 for 45 for 297 yards and two touchdowns.  He  also threw two interceptions. Cousinsâs final numbers (21 for 30  247 yards) probably didnât win many fantasy matchups this week  but  he  didnât the turn the ball over despite facing constant pressure and  he  made two perfect throws when the Redskins needed it most.
Worst inevitability: The Seahawksâ offense  which scored 41 points in a home win last week and looked completely out of sorts for three quarters on Sunday  finally got into the end zone with 11:53 remaining in the game.  Wilson âs 10-yard pass to Luke Willson capped a six-play  66-yard drive that pulled Seattle to within 10-8. Flutists will appreciate the Seahawksâ touchdown celebration.
Worst poise under pressure: They didnât have a sack to show for it in the first half  but the Redskins hounded  Wilson  from the start. With Seattle at midfield and driving more than halfway through the third quarter   Wilson  was flushed out of the pocket by linebacker Zach Brown and floated an ill-advised pass back across the field. The ball was intended for Baldwin  but intercepted by Will Compton at the Washington 46. Compton almost had his second interception of the game on back-to-back plays on Seattleâs next drive.
Best interception: Kendall Fuller ended Seattleâs fourth possession by driving on a slant route intended for Baldwin and picking off  Wilson . Fullerâs 24-yard return was negated after officials ruled he was down by contact upon replay review  but his team-leading third interception of the season was still a thing of beauty.
[A]:
Russell Wilson