Question: Why could a drug be unmarketable?

Answer: Without F.D.A. approval

Hillary Rodham Clinton’s prescription drug policy proposal, released last week, would hold drug manufacturers accountable to their level of investment in research. But there are some potentially valuable drugs we’ll never get drug companies to invest in — those that cannot be patented. By granting temporary monopolies to innovators, the patent system is widely credited with protecting and promoting innovation. But when it comes to pharmaceuticals, it may be preventing valuable therapies from coming to market. To see evidence of this, just look at the behavior of pharmaceutical firms. When Benjamin Roin, assistant professor of technological innovation, entrepreneurship, and strategic management at M.I.T., did so, he discovered that drug companies discard many potentially good ideas because they’re unpatentable. By interviewing academic researchers and industry insiders and scouring medicinal-chemistry textbooks, Mr. Roin learned that “pharmaceutical companies systematically screen their drug candidates to exclude the ones lacking strong patent protection.” It’s obvious why drug innovators would avoid unpatentable ideas: Bringing a drug to market is expensive. In addition to the costs of scientists and laboratories to discover and sift through potentially therapeutic compounds in the first place, demonstrating efficacy and safety to the Food and Drug Administration requires costly clinical trials. <hl> Without F.D.A. approval , a drug cannot be marketed. <hl>

Hillary Rodham Clinton’s prescription drug policy proposal, released last week, would hold drug manufacturers accountable to their level of investment in research. But there are some potentially valuable drugs we’ll never get drug companies to invest in — those that cannot be patented. By granting temporary monopolies to innovators, the patent system is widely credited with protecting and promoting innovation. But when it comes to pharmaceuticals, it may be preventing valuable therapies from coming to market. To see evidence of this, just look at the behavior of pharmaceutical firms. When Benjamin Roin, assistant professor of technological innovation, entrepreneurship, and strategic management at M.I.T., did so, he discovered that drug companies discard many potentially good ideas because they’re unpatentable. By interviewing academic researchers and industry insiders and scouring medicinal-chemistry textbooks, Mr. Roin learned that “pharmaceutical companies systematically screen their drug candidates to exclude the ones lacking strong patent protection.” It’s obvious why drug innovators would avoid unpatentable ideas: Bringing a drug to market is expensive. In addition to the costs of scientists and laboratories to discover and sift through potentially therapeutic compounds in the first place, demonstrating efficacy and safety to the Food and Drug Administration requires costly clinical trials. <hl> Without F.D.A. approval <hl>, a drug cannot be marketed.

<hl> Without F.D.A. approval <hl> , a drug cannot be marketed.


Question: Which prescription drug issue is at the forefront of the presidential campaign?

The expense of prescription drugs has come to the forefront in the presidential campaign with proposals by Bernie Sanders and Mrs. Clinton to rein in drug prices. Patent law also plays a big role in the debate over drug prices, though it is not directly addressed by the two Democratic candidates. Drug manufacturers say that they need to recoup the high cost of drug development by charging high prices during the period they hold effective monopolies. A recent estimate, though contested, put the price of developing a drug from scratch as high as $2.6 billion. Other estimates suggest it could be as low as $161 million. Either way, it’s a lot of money. Without regulatory constraints, results from such an investment could be used by anyone to develop and market drugs.

Answer: The expense

<hl> The expense of prescription drugs has come to the forefront in the presidential campaign with proposals by Bernie Sanders and Mrs. Clinton to rein in drug prices. <hl> Patent law also plays a big role in the debate over drug prices, though it is not directly addressed by the two Democratic candidates. Drug manufacturers say that they need to recoup the high cost of drug development by charging high prices during the period they hold effective monopolies. A recent estimate, though contested, put the price of developing a drug from scratch as high as $2.6 billion. Other estimates suggest it could be as low as $161 million. Either way, it’s a lot of money. Without regulatory constraints, results from such an investment could be used by anyone to develop and market drugs.

<hl> The expense <hl> of prescription drugs has come to the forefront in the presidential campaign with proposals by Bernie Sanders and Mrs. Clinton to rein in drug prices. Patent law also plays a big role in the debate over drug prices, though it is not directly addressed by the two Democratic candidates. Drug manufacturers say that they need to recoup the high cost of drug development by charging high prices during the period they hold effective monopolies. A recent estimate, though contested, put the price of developing a drug from scratch as high as $2.6 billion. Other estimates suggest it could be as low as $161 million. Either way, it’s a lot of money. Without regulatory constraints, results from such an investment could be used by anyone to develop and market drugs.


Question: What are the presidential candidates proposing to do in regards to drug prices?

Answer: rein in

<hl> The expense of prescription drugs has come to the forefront in the presidential campaign with proposals by Bernie Sanders and Mrs. Clinton to rein in drug prices. <hl> Patent law also plays a big role in the debate over drug prices, though it is not directly addressed by the two Democratic candidates. Drug manufacturers say that they need to recoup the high cost of drug development by charging high prices during the period they hold effective monopolies. A recent estimate, though contested, put the price of developing a drug from scratch as high as $2.6 billion. Other estimates suggest it could be as low as $161 million. Either way, it’s a lot of money. Without regulatory constraints, results from such an investment could be used by anyone to develop and market drugs.

The expense of prescription drugs has come to the forefront in the presidential campaign with proposals by Bernie Sanders and Mrs. Clinton to <hl> rein in <hl> drug prices. Patent law also plays a big role in the debate over drug prices, though it is not directly addressed by the two Democratic candidates. Drug manufacturers say that they need to recoup the high cost of drug development by charging high prices during the period they hold effective monopolies. A recent estimate, though contested, put the price of developing a drug from scratch as high as $2.6 billion. Other estimates suggest it could be as low as $161 million. Either way, it’s a lot of money. Without regulatory constraints, results from such an investment could be used by anyone to develop and market drugs.


Question: Why do drug manufacturers claim they need to charge high prices?

Answer: to recoup the high cost of drug development

The expense of prescription drugs has come to the forefront in the presidential campaign with proposals by Bernie Sanders and Mrs. Clinton to rein in drug prices. Patent law also plays a big role in the debate over drug prices, though it is not directly addressed by the two Democratic candidates. <hl> Drug manufacturers say that they need to recoup the high cost of drug development by charging high prices during the period they hold effective monopolies. <hl> A recent estimate, though contested, put the price of developing a drug from scratch as high as $2.6 billion. Other estimates suggest it could be as low as $161 million. Either way, it’s a lot of money. Without regulatory constraints, results from such an investment could be used by anyone to develop and market drugs.

The expense of prescription drugs has come to the forefront in the presidential campaign with proposals by Bernie Sanders and Mrs. Clinton to rein in drug prices. Patent law also plays a big role in the debate over drug prices, though it is not directly addressed by the two Democratic candidates. Drug manufacturers say that they need <hl> to recoup the high cost of drug development <hl> by charging high prices during the period they hold effective monopolies. A recent estimate, though contested, put the price of developing a drug from scratch as high as $2.6 billion. Other estimates suggest it could be as low as $161 million. Either way, it’s a lot of money. Without regulatory constraints, results from such an investment could be used by anyone to develop and market drugs.


Question: How high could the cost allegedly be of developing a drug from scratch?

Answer: as high as $2.6 billion

The expense of prescription drugs has come to the forefront in the presidential campaign with proposals by Bernie Sanders and Mrs. Clinton to rein in drug prices. Patent law also plays a big role in the debate over drug prices, though it is not directly addressed by the two Democratic candidates. Drug manufacturers say that they need to recoup the high cost of drug development by charging high prices during the period they hold effective monopolies. <hl> A recent estimate, though contested, put the price of developing a drug from scratch as high as $2.6 billion . <hl> Other estimates suggest it could be as low as $161 million. Either way, it’s a lot of money. Without regulatory constraints, results from such an investment could be used by anyone to develop and market drugs.

The expense of prescription drugs has come to the forefront in the presidential campaign with proposals by Bernie Sanders and Mrs. Clinton to rein in drug prices. Patent law also plays a big role in the debate over drug prices, though it is not directly addressed by the two Democratic candidates. Drug manufacturers say that they need to recoup the high cost of drug development by charging high prices during the period they hold effective monopolies. A recent estimate, though contested, put the price of developing a drug from scratch <hl> as high as $2.6 billion <hl>. Other estimates suggest it could be as low as $161 million. Either way, it’s a lot of money. Without regulatory constraints, results from such an investment could be used by anyone to develop and market drugs.

A recent estimate, though contested, put the price of developing a drug from scratch <hl> as high as $2.6 billion <hl> .


Question: What would happen to the investment of drug development if the industry isn't regulated?

Answer: an investment could be used by anyone

The expense of prescription drugs has come to the forefront in the presidential campaign with proposals by Bernie Sanders and Mrs. Clinton to rein in drug prices. Patent law also plays a big role in the debate over drug prices, though it is not directly addressed by the two Democratic candidates. Drug manufacturers say that they need to recoup the high cost of drug development by charging high prices during the period they hold effective monopolies. A recent estimate, though contested, put the price of developing a drug from scratch as high as $2.6 billion. Other estimates suggest it could be as low as $161 million. Either way, it’s a lot of money. <hl> Without regulatory constraints, results from such an investment could be used by anyone to develop and market drugs. <hl>

The expense of prescription drugs has come to the forefront in the presidential campaign with proposals by Bernie Sanders and Mrs. Clinton to rein in drug prices. Patent law also plays a big role in the debate over drug prices, though it is not directly addressed by the two Democratic candidates. Drug manufacturers say that they need to recoup the high cost of drug development by charging high prices during the period they hold effective monopolies. A recent estimate, though contested, put the price of developing a drug from scratch as high as $2.6 billion. Other estimates suggest it could be as low as $161 million. Either way, it’s a lot of money. Without regulatory constraints, results from such <hl> an investment could be used by anyone <hl> to develop and market drugs.


Question: What can a drug patent holder do during its patent period?

And that’s why pharmaceutical innovators pursue leads that can be patented. A drug patent, along with subsequent F.D.A. approval and granting of market exclusivity, offers the patent holder a period of time during which it may market the drug without competition. Even though the information about the efficacy and safety of the drug is available after clinical trials have been run, no other organization may use it to secure F.D.A. approval during the patent protection period. Typically, a drug reaches the market with about 13 years left on its original patent, though in some cases it can be extended longer. During the granted period of market exclusivity, pharmaceutical manufacturers can price drugs higher than they could if there were competition from firms marketing the same molecule. By doing so, they recover their investment and make a profit. Though many people are shocked by the high prices of some prescription drugs — like Gilead Sciences’ Sovaldi, a new and effective treatment for hepatitis C that can cost $84,000 per treatment — they’re the inducement for innovation.

Answer: market the drug without competition

And that’s why pharmaceutical innovators pursue leads that can be patented. A drug patent, along with subsequent F.D.A. approval and granting of market exclusivity, offers the patent holder a period of time during which <hl> it may market the drug without competition . <hl> Even though the information about the efficacy and safety of the drug is available after clinical trials have been run, no other organization may use it to secure F.D.A. approval during the patent protection period. Typically, a drug reaches the market with about 13 years left on its original patent, though in some cases it can be extended longer. During the granted period of market exclusivity, pharmaceutical manufacturers can price drugs higher than they could if there were competition from firms marketing the same molecule. By doing so, they recover their investment and make a profit. Though many people are shocked by the high prices of some prescription drugs — like Gilead Sciences’ Sovaldi, a new and effective treatment for hepatitis C that can cost $84,000 per treatment — they’re the inducement for innovation.

And that’s why pharmaceutical innovators pursue leads that can be patented. A drug patent, along with subsequent F.D.A. approval and granting of market exclusivity, offers the patent holder a period of time during which it may <hl> market the drug without competition <hl>. Even though the information about the efficacy and safety of the drug is available after clinical trials have been run, no other organization may use it to secure F.D.A. approval during the patent protection period. Typically, a drug reaches the market with about 13 years left on its original patent, though in some cases it can be extended longer. During the granted period of market exclusivity, pharmaceutical manufacturers can price drugs higher than they could if there were competition from firms marketing the same molecule. By doing so, they recover their investment and make a profit. Though many people are shocked by the high prices of some prescription drugs — like Gilead Sciences’ Sovaldi, a new and effective treatment for hepatitis C that can cost $84,000 per treatment — they’re the inducement for innovation.

it may <hl> market the drug without competition <hl> .


Question: During the patent period, can non-patent-holding companies preemptively gain FDA approval for the drug?

Answer: no

<hl> And that’s why pharmaceutical in no vators pursue leads that can be patented. <hl> A drug patent, along with subsequent F.D.A. approval and granting of market exclusivity, offers the patent holder a period of time during which it may market the drug without competition. Even though the information about the efficacy and safety of the drug is available after clinical trials have been run, no other organization may use it to secure F.D.A. approval during the patent protection period. Typically, a drug reaches the market with about 13 years left on its original patent, though in some cases it can be extended longer. During the granted period of market exclusivity, pharmaceutical manufacturers can price drugs higher than they could if there were competition from firms marketing the same molecule. By doing so, they recover their investment and make a profit. Though many people are shocked by the high prices of some prescription drugs — like Gilead Sciences’ Sovaldi, a new and effective treatment for hepatitis C that can cost $84,000 per treatment — they’re the inducement for innovation.

And that’s why pharmaceutical in<hl> no <hl>vators pursue leads that can be patented. A drug patent, along with subsequent F.D.A. approval and granting of market exclusivity, offers the patent holder a period of time during which it may market the drug without competition. Even though the information about the efficacy and safety of the drug is available after clinical trials have been run, no other organization may use it to secure F.D.A. approval during the patent protection period. Typically, a drug reaches the market with about 13 years left on its original patent, though in some cases it can be extended longer. During the granted period of market exclusivity, pharmaceutical manufacturers can price drugs higher than they could if there were competition from firms marketing the same molecule. By doing so, they recover their investment and make a profit. Though many people are shocked by the high prices of some prescription drugs — like Gilead Sciences’ Sovaldi, a new and effective treatment for hepatitis C that can cost $84,000 per treatment — they’re the inducement for innovation.

And that’s why pharmaceutical in <hl> no <hl> vators pursue leads that can be patented.


Question: Can a drug patent be extended beyond its original patent protection period?

Answer: in some cases

And that’s why pharmaceutical innovators pursue leads that can be patented. A drug patent, along with subsequent F.D.A. approval and granting of market exclusivity, offers the patent holder a period of time during which it may market the drug without competition. Even though the information about the efficacy and safety of the drug is available after clinical trials have been run, no other organization may use it to secure F.D.A. approval during the patent protection period. <hl> Typically, a drug reaches the market with about 13 years left on its original patent, though in some cases it can be extended longer. <hl> During the granted period of market exclusivity, pharmaceutical manufacturers can price drugs higher than they could if there were competition from firms marketing the same molecule. By doing so, they recover their investment and make a profit. Though many people are shocked by the high prices of some prescription drugs — like Gilead Sciences’ Sovaldi, a new and effective treatment for hepatitis C that can cost $84,000 per treatment — they’re the inducement for innovation.

And that’s why pharmaceutical innovators pursue leads that can be patented. A drug patent, along with subsequent F.D.A. approval and granting of market exclusivity, offers the patent holder a period of time during which it may market the drug without competition. Even though the information about the efficacy and safety of the drug is available after clinical trials have been run, no other organization may use it to secure F.D.A. approval during the patent protection period. Typically, a drug reaches the market with about 13 years left on its original patent, though <hl> in some cases <hl> it can be extended longer. During the granted period of market exclusivity, pharmaceutical manufacturers can price drugs higher than they could if there were competition from firms marketing the same molecule. By doing so, they recover their investment and make a profit. Though many people are shocked by the high prices of some prescription drugs — like Gilead Sciences’ Sovaldi, a new and effective treatment for hepatitis C that can cost $84,000 per treatment — they’re the inducement for innovation.


Question: What is the benefit of high drug prices?

Answer: they’re the inducement for innovation

And that’s why pharmaceutical innovators pursue leads that can be patented. A drug patent, along with subsequent F.D.A. approval and granting of market exclusivity, offers the patent holder a period of time during which it may market the drug without competition. Even though the information about the efficacy and safety of the drug is available after clinical trials have been run, no other organization may use it to secure F.D.A. approval during the patent protection period. Typically, a drug reaches the market with about 13 years left on its original patent, though in some cases it can be extended longer. During the granted period of market exclusivity, pharmaceutical manufacturers can price drugs higher than they could if there were competition from firms marketing the same molecule. By doing so, they recover their investment and make a profit. <hl> Though many people are shocked by the high prices of some prescription drugs — like Gilead Sciences’ Sovaldi, a new and effective treatment for hepatitis C that can cost $84,000 per treatment — they’re the inducement for innovation . <hl>

And that’s why pharmaceutical innovators pursue leads that can be patented. A drug patent, along with subsequent F.D.A. approval and granting of market exclusivity, offers the patent holder a period of time during which it may market the drug without competition. Even though the information about the efficacy and safety of the drug is available after clinical trials have been run, no other organization may use it to secure F.D.A. approval during the patent protection period. Typically, a drug reaches the market with about 13 years left on its original patent, though in some cases it can be extended longer. During the granted period of market exclusivity, pharmaceutical manufacturers can price drugs higher than they could if there were competition from firms marketing the same molecule. By doing so, they recover their investment and make a profit. Though many people are shocked by the high prices of some prescription drugs — like Gilead Sciences’ Sovaldi, a new and effective treatment for hepatitis C that can cost $84,000 per treatment — <hl> they’re the inducement for innovation <hl>.

Though many people are shocked by the high prices of some prescription drugs — like Gilead Sciences’ Sovaldi, a new and effective treatment for hepatitis C that can cost $84,000 per treatment — <hl> they’re the inducement for innovation <hl> .


Question: What makes the patent protection period so profitable?

Answer: manufacturers can price drugs higher

And that’s why pharmaceutical innovators pursue leads that can be patented. A drug patent, along with subsequent F.D.A. approval and granting of market exclusivity, offers the patent holder a period of time during which it may market the drug without competition. Even though the information about the efficacy and safety of the drug is available after clinical trials have been run, no other organization may use it to secure F.D.A. approval during the patent protection period. Typically, a drug reaches the market with about 13 years left on its original patent, though in some cases it can be extended longer. <hl> During the granted period of market exclusivity, pharmaceutical manufacturers can price drugs higher than they could if there were competition from firms marketing the same molecule. <hl> By doing so, they recover their investment and make a profit. Though many people are shocked by the high prices of some prescription drugs — like Gilead Sciences’ Sovaldi, a new and effective treatment for hepatitis C that can cost $84,000 per treatment — they’re the inducement for innovation.

And that’s why pharmaceutical innovators pursue leads that can be patented. A drug patent, along with subsequent F.D.A. approval and granting of market exclusivity, offers the patent holder a period of time during which it may market the drug without competition. Even though the information about the efficacy and safety of the drug is available after clinical trials have been run, no other organization may use it to secure F.D.A. approval during the patent protection period. Typically, a drug reaches the market with about 13 years left on its original patent, though in some cases it can be extended longer. During the granted period of market exclusivity, pharmaceutical <hl> manufacturers can price drugs higher <hl> than they could if there were competition from firms marketing the same molecule. By doing so, they recover their investment and make a profit. Though many people are shocked by the high prices of some prescription drugs — like Gilead Sciences’ Sovaldi, a new and effective treatment for hepatitis C that can cost $84,000 per treatment — they’re the inducement for innovation.


Question: What is the primary reason for the existence of new drugs?

Profits made during their period of market exclusivity are, in large part, why new drugs exist, though an argument could be made that the rewards far outstrip development costs. Nevertheless, few companies will sink hundreds of millions of dollars into even a potentially lifesaving idea without the promise of a return on investment, nor should we reasonably expect them to. That’s why we provide patents for good ideas (and, yes, some not-so-good ideas, too). Except sometimes we don’t. By law, patents can be denied for ideas that may be good, but are not novel or are obvious. This sounds completely sensible, until you think through the consequences. It means that even potentially great drugs might not come to market because they were disclosed in the past — so they’re now not novel — or because they are a natural extension of existing knowledge — so they’re now obvious.

Answer: Profits

<hl> Profits made during their period of market exclusivity are, in large part, why new drugs exist, though an argument could be made that the rewards far outstrip development costs. <hl> Nevertheless, few companies will sink hundreds of millions of dollars into even a potentially lifesaving idea without the promise of a return on investment, nor should we reasonably expect them to. That’s why we provide patents for good ideas (and, yes, some not-so-good ideas, too). Except sometimes we don’t. By law, patents can be denied for ideas that may be good, but are not novel or are obvious. This sounds completely sensible, until you think through the consequences. It means that even potentially great drugs might not come to market because they were disclosed in the past — so they’re now not novel — or because they are a natural extension of existing knowledge — so they’re now obvious.

<hl> Profits <hl> made during their period of market exclusivity are, in large part, why new drugs exist, though an argument could be made that the rewards far outstrip development costs. Nevertheless, few companies will sink hundreds of millions of dollars into even a potentially lifesaving idea without the promise of a return on investment, nor should we reasonably expect them to. That’s why we provide patents for good ideas (and, yes, some not-so-good ideas, too). Except sometimes we don’t. By law, patents can be denied for ideas that may be good, but are not novel or are obvious. This sounds completely sensible, until you think through the consequences. It means that even potentially great drugs might not come to market because they were disclosed in the past — so they’re now not novel — or because they are a natural extension of existing knowledge — so they’re now obvious.


Question: What do patents offer to drug companies?

Answer: return on investment

Profits made during their period of market exclusivity are, in large part, why new drugs exist, though an argument could be made that the rewards far outstrip development costs. <hl> Nevertheless, few companies will sink hundreds of millions of dollars into even a potentially lifesaving idea without the promise of a return on investment , nor should we reasonably expect them to. <hl> That’s why we provide patents for good ideas (and, yes, some not-so-good ideas, too). Except sometimes we don’t. By law, patents can be denied for ideas that may be good, but are not novel or are obvious. This sounds completely sensible, until you think through the consequences. It means that even potentially great drugs might not come to market because they were disclosed in the past — so they’re now not novel — or because they are a natural extension of existing knowledge — so they’re now obvious.

Profits made during their period of market exclusivity are, in large part, why new drugs exist, though an argument could be made that the rewards far outstrip development costs. Nevertheless, few companies will sink hundreds of millions of dollars into even a potentially lifesaving idea without the promise of a <hl> return on investment <hl>, nor should we reasonably expect them to. That’s why we provide patents for good ideas (and, yes, some not-so-good ideas, too). Except sometimes we don’t. By law, patents can be denied for ideas that may be good, but are not novel or are obvious. This sounds completely sensible, until you think through the consequences. It means that even potentially great drugs might not come to market because they were disclosed in the past — so they’re now not novel — or because they are a natural extension of existing knowledge — so they’re now obvious.

Nevertheless, few companies will sink hundreds of millions of dollars into even a potentially lifesaving idea without the promise of a <hl> return on investment <hl> , nor should we reasonably expect them to.


Question: Which types of drug concepts are not offered patents?

Answer: not novel or are obvious

Profits made during their period of market exclusivity are, in large part, why new drugs exist, though an argument could be made that the rewards far outstrip development costs. Nevertheless, few companies will sink hundreds of millions of dollars into even a potentially lifesaving idea without the promise of a return on investment, nor should we reasonably expect them to. That’s why we provide patents for good ideas (and, yes, some not-so-good ideas, too). Except sometimes we don’t. <hl> By law, patents can be denied for ideas that may be good, but are not novel or are obvious . <hl> This sounds completely sensible, until you think through the consequences. It means that even potentially great drugs might not come to market because they were disclosed in the past — so they’re now not novel — or because they are a natural extension of existing knowledge — so they’re now obvious.

Profits made during their period of market exclusivity are, in large part, why new drugs exist, though an argument could be made that the rewards far outstrip development costs. Nevertheless, few companies will sink hundreds of millions of dollars into even a potentially lifesaving idea without the promise of a return on investment, nor should we reasonably expect them to. That’s why we provide patents for good ideas (and, yes, some not-so-good ideas, too). Except sometimes we don’t. By law, patents can be denied for ideas that may be good, but are <hl> not novel or are obvious <hl>. This sounds completely sensible, until you think through the consequences. It means that even potentially great drugs might not come to market because they were disclosed in the past — so they’re now not novel — or because they are a natural extension of existing knowledge — so they’re now obvious.

By law, patents can be denied for ideas that may be good, but are <hl> not novel or are obvious <hl> .


Question: What is a consequence of a patent being denied on the basis that it isn't novel?

Answer: drugs might not come to market

Profits made during their period of market exclusivity are, in large part, why new drugs exist, though an argument could be made that the rewards far outstrip development costs. Nevertheless, few companies will sink hundreds of millions of dollars into even a potentially lifesaving idea without the promise of a return on investment, nor should we reasonably expect them to. That’s why we provide patents for good ideas (and, yes, some not-so-good ideas, too). Except sometimes we don’t. By law, patents can be denied for ideas that may be good, but are not novel or are obvious. This sounds completely sensible, until you think through the consequences. <hl> It means that even potentially great drugs might not come to market because they were disclosed in the past — so they’re now not novel — or because they are a natural extension of existing knowledge — so they’re now obvious. <hl>

Profits made during their period of market exclusivity are, in large part, why new drugs exist, though an argument could be made that the rewards far outstrip development costs. Nevertheless, few companies will sink hundreds of millions of dollars into even a potentially lifesaving idea without the promise of a return on investment, nor should we reasonably expect them to. That’s why we provide patents for good ideas (and, yes, some not-so-good ideas, too). Except sometimes we don’t. By law, patents can be denied for ideas that may be good, but are not novel or are obvious. This sounds completely sensible, until you think through the consequences. It means that even potentially great <hl> drugs might not come to market <hl> because they were disclosed in the past — so they’re now not novel — or because they are a natural extension of existing knowledge — so they’re now obvious.


Question: What is the defining characteristic of a "me too" drug?

Prior disclosure can come in the form of an obscure research article; an old, expired patent; or inclusion of a chemical structure in a giant online database, for example. (When it comes to obviousness, there’s a tension. We don’t want to provide patent protection for profit-increasing activities that do not benefit patients, like “me too” drugs — drugs that are only trivially different from existing ones. But some things that are obvious also might be beneficial, and for those we’d want to encourage development.) The crux of the problem is this: For pharmaceuticals, patent protection is used as a means for innovators to recoup the costly investments that drug development requires. But the patent system was not devised to solve this specific problem. It’s a broader system intended to encourage innovation, which it does, while at the same time permitting individuals and firms to exploit obvious and old ideas freely, which is generally a valuable protection.

Answer: trivially different from existing ones

Prior disclosure can come in the form of an obscure research article; an old, expired patent; or inclusion of a chemical structure in a giant online database, for example. (When it comes to obviousness, there’s a tension. <hl> We don’t want to provide patent protection for profit-increasing activities that do not benefit patients, like “me too” drugs — drugs that are only trivially different from existing ones . <hl> But some things that are obvious also might be beneficial, and for those we’d want to encourage development.) The crux of the problem is this: For pharmaceuticals, patent protection is used as a means for innovators to recoup the costly investments that drug development requires. But the patent system was not devised to solve this specific problem. It’s a broader system intended to encourage innovation, which it does, while at the same time permitting individuals and firms to exploit obvious and old ideas freely, which is generally a valuable protection.

Prior disclosure can come in the form of an obscure research article; an old, expired patent; or inclusion of a chemical structure in a giant online database, for example. (When it comes to obviousness, there’s a tension. We don’t want to provide patent protection for profit-increasing activities that do not benefit patients, like “me too” drugs — drugs that are only <hl> trivially different from existing ones <hl>. But some things that are obvious also might be beneficial, and for those we’d want to encourage development.) The crux of the problem is this: For pharmaceuticals, patent protection is used as a means for innovators to recoup the costly investments that drug development requires. But the patent system was not devised to solve this specific problem. It’s a broader system intended to encourage innovation, which it does, while at the same time permitting individuals and firms to exploit obvious and old ideas freely, which is generally a valuable protection.

We don’t want to provide patent protection for profit-increasing activities that do not benefit patients, like “me too” drugs — drugs that are only <hl> trivially different from existing ones <hl> .


Question: What is the purpose of the patent system?

Answer: to encourage innovation

Prior disclosure can come in the form of an obscure research article; an old, expired patent; or inclusion of a chemical structure in a giant online database, for example. (When it comes to obviousness, there’s a tension. We don’t want to provide patent protection for profit-increasing activities that do not benefit patients, like “me too” drugs — drugs that are only trivially different from existing ones. But some things that are obvious also might be beneficial, and for those we’d want to encourage development.) The crux of the problem is this: For pharmaceuticals, patent protection is used as a means for innovators to recoup the costly investments that drug development requires. But the patent system was not devised to solve this specific problem. <hl> It’s a broader system intended to encourage innovation , which it does, while at the same time permitting individuals and firms to exploit obvious and old ideas freely, which is generally a valuable protection. <hl>

Prior disclosure can come in the form of an obscure research article; an old, expired patent; or inclusion of a chemical structure in a giant online database, for example. (When it comes to obviousness, there’s a tension. We don’t want to provide patent protection for profit-increasing activities that do not benefit patients, like “me too” drugs — drugs that are only trivially different from existing ones. But some things that are obvious also might be beneficial, and for those we’d want to encourage development.) The crux of the problem is this: For pharmaceuticals, patent protection is used as a means for innovators to recoup the costly investments that drug development requires. But the patent system was not devised to solve this specific problem. It’s a broader system intended <hl> to encourage innovation <hl>, which it does, while at the same time permitting individuals and firms to exploit obvious and old ideas freely, which is generally a valuable protection.

It’s a broader system intended <hl> to encourage innovation <hl> , which it does, while at the same time permitting individuals and firms to exploit obvious and old ideas freely, which is generally a valuable protection.


Question: What does the patent system allow people to do?

Answer: exploit obvious and old ideas freely

Prior disclosure can come in the form of an obscure research article; an old, expired patent; or inclusion of a chemical structure in a giant online database, for example. (When it comes to obviousness, there’s a tension. We don’t want to provide patent protection for profit-increasing activities that do not benefit patients, like “me too” drugs — drugs that are only trivially different from existing ones. But some things that are obvious also might be beneficial, and for those we’d want to encourage development.) The crux of the problem is this: For pharmaceuticals, patent protection is used as a means for innovators to recoup the costly investments that drug development requires. But the patent system was not devised to solve this specific problem. <hl> It’s a broader system intended to encourage innovation, which it does, while at the same time permitting individuals and firms to exploit obvious and old ideas freely , which is generally a valuable protection. <hl>

Prior disclosure can come in the form of an obscure research article; an old, expired patent; or inclusion of a chemical structure in a giant online database, for example. (When it comes to obviousness, there’s a tension. We don’t want to provide patent protection for profit-increasing activities that do not benefit patients, like “me too” drugs — drugs that are only trivially different from existing ones. But some things that are obvious also might be beneficial, and for those we’d want to encourage development.) The crux of the problem is this: For pharmaceuticals, patent protection is used as a means for innovators to recoup the costly investments that drug development requires. But the patent system was not devised to solve this specific problem. It’s a broader system intended to encourage innovation, which it does, while at the same time permitting individuals and firms to <hl> exploit obvious and old ideas freely <hl>, which is generally a valuable protection.

It’s a broader system intended to encourage innovation, which it does, while at the same time permitting individuals and firms to <hl> exploit obvious and old ideas freely <hl> , which is generally a valuable protection.


Question: When do we want to avoid providing patent protection for profit-increasing activities?

Answer: not benefit patients

Prior disclosure can come in the form of an obscure research article; an old, expired patent; or inclusion of a chemical structure in a giant online database, for example. (When it comes to obviousness, there’s a tension. <hl> We don’t want to provide patent protection for profit-increasing activities that do not benefit patients , like “me too” drugs — drugs that are only trivially different from existing ones. <hl> But some things that are obvious also might be beneficial, and for those we’d want to encourage development.) The crux of the problem is this: For pharmaceuticals, patent protection is used as a means for innovators to recoup the costly investments that drug development requires. But the patent system was not devised to solve this specific problem. It’s a broader system intended to encourage innovation, which it does, while at the same time permitting individuals and firms to exploit obvious and old ideas freely, which is generally a valuable protection.

Prior disclosure can come in the form of an obscure research article; an old, expired patent; or inclusion of a chemical structure in a giant online database, for example. (When it comes to obviousness, there’s a tension. We don’t want to provide patent protection for profit-increasing activities that do <hl> not benefit patients <hl>, like “me too” drugs — drugs that are only trivially different from existing ones. But some things that are obvious also might be beneficial, and for those we’d want to encourage development.) The crux of the problem is this: For pharmaceuticals, patent protection is used as a means for innovators to recoup the costly investments that drug development requires. But the patent system was not devised to solve this specific problem. It’s a broader system intended to encourage innovation, which it does, while at the same time permitting individuals and firms to exploit obvious and old ideas freely, which is generally a valuable protection.

We don’t want to provide patent protection for profit-increasing activities that do <hl> not benefit patients <hl> , like “me too” drugs — drugs that are only trivially different from existing ones.


Question: What is a requirement of F.D.A approval for a drug?

When it comes to drugs, some of those obvious, old ideas that cannot be patented have not been clinically tested, as required for F.D.A. approval. That takes money, which nobody will invest without a patent. It’s a Catch-22 that ends up excluding potentially valuable drugs from ever even being considered for development. There’s evidence that the provision of patents only for nonobvious and novel innovations affects drug development. In a paper published in the Texas Law Review, Mr. Roin documents many examples of patent invalidation on these grounds — importantly, even for ideas that had never been developed into drugs and that still required clinical trials for F.D.A. approval. For example, the patent of an anti-inflammatory drug was invalidated because it had been disclosed in a prior academic article. A patent for a hypertension drug was invalidated because it was deemed to have been created by a well-known process.

Answer: been clinically tested

<hl> When it comes to drugs, some of those obvious, old ideas that cannot be patented have not been clinically tested , as required for F.D.A. approval. <hl> That takes money, which nobody will invest without a patent. It’s a Catch-22 that ends up excluding potentially valuable drugs from ever even being considered for development. There’s evidence that the provision of patents only for nonobvious and novel innovations affects drug development. In a paper published in the Texas Law Review, Mr. Roin documents many examples of patent invalidation on these grounds — importantly, even for ideas that had never been developed into drugs and that still required clinical trials for F.D.A. approval. For example, the patent of an anti-inflammatory drug was invalidated because it had been disclosed in a prior academic article. A patent for a hypertension drug was invalidated because it was deemed to have been created by a well-known process.

When it comes to drugs, some of those obvious, old ideas that cannot be patented have not <hl> been clinically tested <hl>, as required for F.D.A. approval. That takes money, which nobody will invest without a patent. It’s a Catch-22 that ends up excluding potentially valuable drugs from ever even being considered for development. There’s evidence that the provision of patents only for nonobvious and novel innovations affects drug development. In a paper published in the Texas Law Review, Mr. Roin documents many examples of patent invalidation on these grounds — importantly, even for ideas that had never been developed into drugs and that still required clinical trials for F.D.A. approval. For example, the patent of an anti-inflammatory drug was invalidated because it had been disclosed in a prior academic article. A patent for a hypertension drug was invalidated because it was deemed to have been created by a well-known process.

When it comes to drugs, some of those obvious, old ideas that cannot be patented have not <hl> been clinically tested <hl> , as required for F.D.A. approval.


Question: Why would someone avoid investing in a drug?

Answer: without a patent

When it comes to drugs, some of those obvious, old ideas that cannot be patented have not been clinically tested, as required for F.D.A. approval. <hl> That takes money, which nobody will invest without a patent . <hl> It’s a Catch-22 that ends up excluding potentially valuable drugs from ever even being considered for development. There’s evidence that the provision of patents only for nonobvious and novel innovations affects drug development. In a paper published in the Texas Law Review, Mr. Roin documents many examples of patent invalidation on these grounds — importantly, even for ideas that had never been developed into drugs and that still required clinical trials for F.D.A. approval. For example, the patent of an anti-inflammatory drug was invalidated because it had been disclosed in a prior academic article. A patent for a hypertension drug was invalidated because it was deemed to have been created by a well-known process.

When it comes to drugs, some of those obvious, old ideas that cannot be patented have not been clinically tested, as required for F.D.A. approval. That takes money, which nobody will invest <hl> without a patent <hl>. It’s a Catch-22 that ends up excluding potentially valuable drugs from ever even being considered for development. There’s evidence that the provision of patents only for nonobvious and novel innovations affects drug development. In a paper published in the Texas Law Review, Mr. Roin documents many examples of patent invalidation on these grounds — importantly, even for ideas that had never been developed into drugs and that still required clinical trials for F.D.A. approval. For example, the patent of an anti-inflammatory drug was invalidated because it had been disclosed in a prior academic article. A patent for a hypertension drug was invalidated because it was deemed to have been created by a well-known process.

That takes money, which nobody will invest <hl> without a patent <hl> .


Question: What kinds of drug concepts may have invalidated patents?

Answer: obvious, old ideas

<hl> When it comes to drugs, some of those obvious, old ideas that cannot be patented have not been clinically tested, as required for F.D.A. approval. <hl> That takes money, which nobody will invest without a patent. It’s a Catch-22 that ends up excluding potentially valuable drugs from ever even being considered for development. There’s evidence that the provision of patents only for nonobvious and novel innovations affects drug development. In a paper published in the Texas Law Review, Mr. Roin documents many examples of patent invalidation on these grounds — importantly, even for ideas that had never been developed into drugs and that still required clinical trials for F.D.A. approval. For example, the patent of an anti-inflammatory drug was invalidated because it had been disclosed in a prior academic article. A patent for a hypertension drug was invalidated because it was deemed to have been created by a well-known process.

When it comes to drugs, some of those <hl> obvious, old ideas <hl> that cannot be patented have not been clinically tested, as required for F.D.A. approval. That takes money, which nobody will invest without a patent. It’s a Catch-22 that ends up excluding potentially valuable drugs from ever even being considered for development. There’s evidence that the provision of patents only for nonobvious and novel innovations affects drug development. In a paper published in the Texas Law Review, Mr. Roin documents many examples of patent invalidation on these grounds — importantly, even for ideas that had never been developed into drugs and that still required clinical trials for F.D.A. approval. For example, the patent of an anti-inflammatory drug was invalidated because it had been disclosed in a prior academic article. A patent for a hypertension drug was invalidated because it was deemed to have been created by a well-known process.


Question: What can happen to a drug patent if it's discovered to have been disclosed in an old academic article?

Answer: patent invalidation

When it comes to drugs, some of those obvious, old ideas that cannot be patented have not been clinically tested, as required for F.D.A. approval. That takes money, which nobody will invest without a patent. It’s a Catch-22 that ends up excluding potentially valuable drugs from ever even being considered for development. There’s evidence that the provision of patents only for nonobvious and novel innovations affects drug development. <hl> In a paper published in the Texas Law Review, Mr. Roin documents many examples of patent invalidation on these grounds — importantly, even for ideas that had never been developed into drugs and that still required clinical trials for F.D.A. approval. <hl> For example, the patent of an anti-inflammatory drug was invalidated because it had been disclosed in a prior academic article. A patent for a hypertension drug was invalidated because it was deemed to have been created by a well-known process.

When it comes to drugs, some of those obvious, old ideas that cannot be patented have not been clinically tested, as required for F.D.A. approval. That takes money, which nobody will invest without a patent. It’s a Catch-22 that ends up excluding potentially valuable drugs from ever even being considered for development. There’s evidence that the provision of patents only for nonobvious and novel innovations affects drug development. In a paper published in the Texas Law Review, Mr. Roin documents many examples of <hl> patent invalidation <hl> on these grounds — importantly, even for ideas that had never been developed into drugs and that still required clinical trials for F.D.A. approval. For example, the patent of an anti-inflammatory drug was invalidated because it had been disclosed in a prior academic article. A patent for a hypertension drug was invalidated because it was deemed to have been created by a well-known process.


Question: What types of drugs can be excluded from development by the lack of a patent?

Answer: potentially valuable

When it comes to drugs, some of those obvious, old ideas that cannot be patented have not been clinically tested, as required for F.D.A. approval. That takes money, which nobody will invest without a patent. <hl> It’s a Catch-22 that ends up excluding potentially valuable drugs from ever even being considered for development. <hl> There’s evidence that the provision of patents only for nonobvious and novel innovations affects drug development. In a paper published in the Texas Law Review, Mr. Roin documents many examples of patent invalidation on these grounds — importantly, even for ideas that had never been developed into drugs and that still required clinical trials for F.D.A. approval. For example, the patent of an anti-inflammatory drug was invalidated because it had been disclosed in a prior academic article. A patent for a hypertension drug was invalidated because it was deemed to have been created by a well-known process.

When it comes to drugs, some of those obvious, old ideas that cannot be patented have not been clinically tested, as required for F.D.A. approval. That takes money, which nobody will invest without a patent. It’s a Catch-22 that ends up excluding <hl> potentially valuable <hl> drugs from ever even being considered for development. There’s evidence that the provision of patents only for nonobvious and novel innovations affects drug development. In a paper published in the Texas Law Review, Mr. Roin documents many examples of patent invalidation on these grounds — importantly, even for ideas that had never been developed into drugs and that still required clinical trials for F.D.A. approval. For example, the patent of an anti-inflammatory drug was invalidated because it had been disclosed in a prior academic article. A patent for a hypertension drug was invalidated because it was deemed to have been created by a well-known process.


Question: What could we offer to incentivize the development of drugs that can solve an unmet need?

Mr. Roin, the M.I.T. professor, describes another approach: to provide a period of market exclusivity — long enough to motivate investment in clinical trials — to any organization addressing an unmet medical need with a drug that isn’t patentable. If it invested in securing F.D.A. approval for a drug based on active ingredients not found in existing drugs, an organization would be granted such a period of market exclusivity and the stream of profits that usually accompanies it, even if the drug was considered obvious and not novel. That idea has been included in congressional legislation, but has not made it into law.

Answer: provide a period of market exclusivity — long enough to motivate investment in clinical trials

<hl> Mr. Roin, the M.I.T. professor, describes another approach: to provide a period of market exclusivity — long enough to motivate investment in clinical trials — to any organization addressing an unmet medical need with a drug that isn’t patentable. <hl> If it invested in securing F.D.A. approval for a drug based on active ingredients not found in existing drugs, an organization would be granted such a period of market exclusivity and the stream of profits that usually accompanies it, even if the drug was considered obvious and not novel. That idea has been included in congressional legislation, but has not made it into law.

Mr. Roin, the M.I.T. professor, describes another approach: to <hl> provide a period of market exclusivity — long enough to motivate investment in clinical trials <hl> — to any organization addressing an unmet medical need with a drug that isn’t patentable. If it invested in securing F.D.A. approval for a drug based on active ingredients not found in existing drugs, an organization would be granted such a period of market exclusivity and the stream of profits that usually accompanies it, even if the drug was considered obvious and not novel. That idea has been included in congressional legislation, but has not made it into law.


Question: What is needed in order to pursue clinical trials?

Answer: investment

<hl> Mr. Roin, the M.I.T. professor, describes another approach: to provide a period of market exclusivity — long enough to motivate investment in clinical trials — to any organization addressing an unmet medical need with a drug that isn’t patentable. <hl> If it invested in securing F.D.A. approval for a drug based on active ingredients not found in existing drugs, an organization would be granted such a period of market exclusivity and the stream of profits that usually accompanies it, even if the drug was considered obvious and not novel. That idea has been included in congressional legislation, but has not made it into law.

Mr. Roin, the M.I.T. professor, describes another approach: to provide a period of market exclusivity — long enough to motivate <hl> investment <hl> in clinical trials — to any organization addressing an unmet medical need with a drug that isn’t patentable. If it invested in securing F.D.A. approval for a drug based on active ingredients not found in existing drugs, an organization would be granted such a period of market exclusivity and the stream of profits that usually accompanies it, even if the drug was considered obvious and not novel. That idea has been included in congressional legislation, but has not made it into law.


Question: Under Mr. Roin's concept, what kinds of drugs would be affected?

Answer: a drug that isn’t patentable

<hl> Mr. Roin, the M.I.T. professor, describes another approach: to provide a period of market exclusivity — long enough to motivate investment in clinical trials — to any organization addressing an unmet medical need with a drug that isn’t patentable . <hl> If it invested in securing F.D.A. approval for a drug based on active ingredients not found in existing drugs, an organization would be granted such a period of market exclusivity and the stream of profits that usually accompanies it, even if the drug was considered obvious and not novel. That idea has been included in congressional legislation, but has not made it into law.

Mr. Roin, the M.I.T. professor, describes another approach: to provide a period of market exclusivity — long enough to motivate investment in clinical trials — to any organization addressing an unmet medical need with <hl> a drug that isn’t patentable <hl>. If it invested in securing F.D.A. approval for a drug based on active ingredients not found in existing drugs, an organization would be granted such a period of market exclusivity and the stream of profits that usually accompanies it, even if the drug was considered obvious and not novel. That idea has been included in congressional legislation, but has not made it into law.

Mr. Roin, the M.I.T. professor, describes another approach: to provide a period of market exclusivity — long enough to motivate investment in clinical trials — to any organization addressing an unmet medical need with <hl> a drug that isn’t patentable <hl> .


Question: What kind of ingredient would a drug need to pursue F.D.A approval?

Answer: ingredients not found in existing drugs

Mr. Roin, the M.I.T. professor, describes another approach: to provide a period of market exclusivity — long enough to motivate investment in clinical trials — to any organization addressing an unmet medical need with a drug that isn’t patentable. <hl> If it invested in securing F.D.A. approval for a drug based on active ingredients not found in existing drugs , an organization would be granted such a period of market exclusivity and the stream of profits that usually accompanies it, even if the drug was considered obvious and not novel. <hl> That idea has been included in congressional legislation, but has not made it into law.

Mr. Roin, the M.I.T. professor, describes another approach: to provide a period of market exclusivity — long enough to motivate investment in clinical trials — to any organization addressing an unmet medical need with a drug that isn’t patentable. If it invested in securing F.D.A. approval for a drug based on active <hl> ingredients not found in existing drugs <hl>, an organization would be granted such a period of market exclusivity and the stream of profits that usually accompanies it, even if the drug was considered obvious and not novel. That idea has been included in congressional legislation, but has not made it into law.

If it invested in securing F.D.A. approval for a drug based on active <hl> ingredients not found in existing drugs <hl> , an organization would be granted such a period of market exclusivity and the stream of profits that usually accompanies it, even if the drug was considered obvious and not novel.


Question: Which type of workers' offices did the police raid?

Reporters in Istanbul covered a police raid on their own offices on Wednesday, as the Turkish government seized control of two television stations and a newspaper group critical of the governing party just four days before national elections. Scuffles between officers and reporters unfolded on live television as the police broke into the shared headquarters of the two channels, KanalTurk and Bugun TV, and ushered in court-appointed trustees who were placed in charge of the company that owns the media group, Koza Ipek Holding.

Answer: Reporters

<hl> Reporters in Istanbul covered a police raid on their own offices on Wednesday, as the Turkish government seized control of two television stations and a newspaper group critical of the governing party just four days before national elections. <hl> Scuffles between officers and reporters unfolded on live television as the police broke into the shared headquarters of the two channels, KanalTurk and Bugun TV, and ushered in court-appointed trustees who were placed in charge of the company that owns the media group, Koza Ipek Holding.

<hl> Reporters <hl> in Istanbul covered a police raid on their own offices on Wednesday, as the Turkish government seized control of two television stations and a newspaper group critical of the governing party just four days before national elections. Scuffles between officers and reporters unfolded on live television as the police broke into the shared headquarters of the two channels, KanalTurk and Bugun TV, and ushered in court-appointed trustees who were placed in charge of the company that owns the media group, Koza Ipek Holding.


Question: Who seized two television stations?

Answer: Turkish government

<hl> Reporters in Istanbul covered a police raid on their own offices on Wednesday, as the Turkish government seized control of two television stations and a newspaper group critical of the governing party just four days before national elections. <hl> Scuffles between officers and reporters unfolded on live television as the police broke into the shared headquarters of the two channels, KanalTurk and Bugun TV, and ushered in court-appointed trustees who were placed in charge of the company that owns the media group, Koza Ipek Holding.

Reporters in Istanbul covered a police raid on their own offices on Wednesday, as the <hl> Turkish government <hl> seized control of two television stations and a newspaper group critical of the governing party just four days before national elections. Scuffles between officers and reporters unfolded on live television as the police broke into the shared headquarters of the two channels, KanalTurk and Bugun TV, and ushered in court-appointed trustees who were placed in charge of the company that owns the media group, Koza Ipek Holding.


Question: What day did the seizing of the television stations happen?

Answer: Wednesday

<hl> Reporters in Istanbul covered a police raid on their own offices on Wednesday , as the Turkish government seized control of two television stations and a newspaper group critical of the governing party just four days before national elections. <hl> Scuffles between officers and reporters unfolded on live television as the police broke into the shared headquarters of the two channels, KanalTurk and Bugun TV, and ushered in court-appointed trustees who were placed in charge of the company that owns the media group, Koza Ipek Holding.

Reporters in Istanbul covered a police raid on their own offices on <hl> Wednesday <hl>, as the Turkish government seized control of two television stations and a newspaper group critical of the governing party just four days before national elections. Scuffles between officers and reporters unfolded on live television as the police broke into the shared headquarters of the two channels, KanalTurk and Bugun TV, and ushered in court-appointed trustees who were placed in charge of the company that owns the media group, Koza Ipek Holding.

Reporters in Istanbul covered a police raid on their own offices on <hl> Wednesday <hl> , as the Turkish government seized control of two television stations and a newspaper group critical of the governing party just four days before national elections.


Question: Who did reporters scuffle with on live television?

Answer: officers

Reporters in Istanbul covered a police raid on their own offices on Wednesday, as the Turkish government seized control of two television stations and a newspaper group critical of the governing party just four days before national elections. <hl> Scuffles between officers and reporters unfolded on live television as the police broke into the shared headquarters of the two channels, KanalTurk and Bugun TV, and ushered in court-appointed trustees who were placed in charge of the company that owns the media group, Koza Ipek Holding. <hl>

Reporters in Istanbul covered a police raid on their own offices on Wednesday, as the Turkish government seized control of two television stations and a newspaper group critical of the governing party just four days before national elections. Scuffles between <hl> officers <hl> and reporters unfolded on live television as the police broke into the shared headquarters of the two channels, KanalTurk and Bugun TV, and ushered in court-appointed trustees who were placed in charge of the company that owns the media group, Koza Ipek Holding.


Question: Which two channels did the police raid?

Answer: KanalTurk and Bugun TV

Reporters in Istanbul covered a police raid on their own offices on Wednesday, as the Turkish government seized control of two television stations and a newspaper group critical of the governing party just four days before national elections. <hl> Scuffles between officers and reporters unfolded on live television as the police broke into the shared headquarters of the two channels, KanalTurk and Bugun TV , and ushered in court-appointed trustees who were placed in charge of the company that owns the media group, Koza Ipek Holding. <hl>

Reporters in Istanbul covered a police raid on their own offices on Wednesday, as the Turkish government seized control of two television stations and a newspaper group critical of the governing party just four days before national elections. Scuffles between officers and reporters unfolded on live television as the police broke into the shared headquarters of the two channels, <hl> KanalTurk and Bugun TV <hl>, and ushered in court-appointed trustees who were placed in charge of the company that owns the media group, Koza Ipek Holding.

Scuffles between officers and reporters unfolded on live television as the police broke into the shared headquarters of the two channels, <hl> KanalTurk and Bugun TV <hl> , and ushered in court-appointed trustees who were placed in charge of the company that owns the media group, Koza Ipek Holding.


Question: How many companies does the conglomerate own?

The conglomerate, which owns 22 companies, including two daily newspapers, Bugun and Millet, stands accused of ties to Fethullah Gulen, an Islamic cleric who lives in exile in Pennsylvania. Mr. Gulen’s followers were once allies of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s moderate Islamist party, but the government now considers them a shadowy underground network to be rooted out through purges of the police, the judiciary and the media. As the police forced camera crews outside the building to stop taking video, journalists retreated to the Bugun control room where Tarik Toros, the broadcaster’s editor in chief, fought the new trustees to keep the channel on the air as long as possible. That struggle was captured by Bugun reporters in dramatic footage that was later posted online with subtitles by Turkey’s Cihan News Agency.

Answer: 22

<hl> The conglomerate, which owns 22 companies, including two daily newspapers, Bugun and Millet, stands accused of ties to Fethullah Gulen, an Islamic cleric who lives in exile in Pennsylvania. <hl> Mr. Gulen’s followers were once allies of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s moderate Islamist party, but the government now considers them a shadowy underground network to be rooted out through purges of the police, the judiciary and the media. As the police forced camera crews outside the building to stop taking video, journalists retreated to the Bugun control room where Tarik Toros, the broadcaster’s editor in chief, fought the new trustees to keep the channel on the air as long as possible. That struggle was captured by Bugun reporters in dramatic footage that was later posted online with subtitles by Turkey’s Cihan News Agency.

The conglomerate, which owns <hl> 22 <hl> companies, including two daily newspapers, Bugun and Millet, stands accused of ties to Fethullah Gulen, an Islamic cleric who lives in exile in Pennsylvania. Mr. Gulen’s followers were once allies of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s moderate Islamist party, but the government now considers them a shadowy underground network to be rooted out through purges of the police, the judiciary and the media. As the police forced camera crews outside the building to stop taking video, journalists retreated to the Bugun control room where Tarik Toros, the broadcaster’s editor in chief, fought the new trustees to keep the channel on the air as long as possible. That struggle was captured by Bugun reporters in dramatic footage that was later posted online with subtitles by Turkey’s Cihan News Agency.


Question: Where does Fethullah Gulen live?

Answer: Pennsylvania

<hl> The conglomerate, which owns 22 companies, including two daily newspapers, Bugun and Millet, stands accused of ties to Fethullah Gulen, an Islamic cleric who lives in exile in Pennsylvania . <hl> Mr. Gulen’s followers were once allies of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s moderate Islamist party, but the government now considers them a shadowy underground network to be rooted out through purges of the police, the judiciary and the media. As the police forced camera crews outside the building to stop taking video, journalists retreated to the Bugun control room where Tarik Toros, the broadcaster’s editor in chief, fought the new trustees to keep the channel on the air as long as possible. That struggle was captured by Bugun reporters in dramatic footage that was later posted online with subtitles by Turkey’s Cihan News Agency.

The conglomerate, which owns 22 companies, including two daily newspapers, Bugun and Millet, stands accused of ties to Fethullah Gulen, an Islamic cleric who lives in exile in <hl> Pennsylvania <hl>. Mr. Gulen’s followers were once allies of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s moderate Islamist party, but the government now considers them a shadowy underground network to be rooted out through purges of the police, the judiciary and the media. As the police forced camera crews outside the building to stop taking video, journalists retreated to the Bugun control room where Tarik Toros, the broadcaster’s editor in chief, fought the new trustees to keep the channel on the air as long as possible. That struggle was captured by Bugun reporters in dramatic footage that was later posted online with subtitles by Turkey’s Cihan News Agency.

The conglomerate, which owns 22 companies, including two daily newspapers, Bugun and Millet, stands accused of ties to Fethullah Gulen, an Islamic cleric who lives in exile in <hl> Pennsylvania <hl> .


Question: What are the two daily newspapers the conglomerate owns?

Answer: Bugun and Millet

<hl> The conglomerate, which owns 22 companies, including two daily newspapers, Bugun and Millet , stands accused of ties to Fethullah Gulen, an Islamic cleric who lives in exile in Pennsylvania. <hl> Mr. Gulen’s followers were once allies of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s moderate Islamist party, but the government now considers them a shadowy underground network to be rooted out through purges of the police, the judiciary and the media. As the police forced camera crews outside the building to stop taking video, journalists retreated to the Bugun control room where Tarik Toros, the broadcaster’s editor in chief, fought the new trustees to keep the channel on the air as long as possible. That struggle was captured by Bugun reporters in dramatic footage that was later posted online with subtitles by Turkey’s Cihan News Agency.

The conglomerate, which owns 22 companies, including two daily newspapers, <hl> Bugun and Millet <hl>, stands accused of ties to Fethullah Gulen, an Islamic cleric who lives in exile in Pennsylvania. Mr. Gulen’s followers were once allies of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s moderate Islamist party, but the government now considers them a shadowy underground network to be rooted out through purges of the police, the judiciary and the media. As the police forced camera crews outside the building to stop taking video, journalists retreated to the Bugun control room where Tarik Toros, the broadcaster’s editor in chief, fought the new trustees to keep the channel on the air as long as possible. That struggle was captured by Bugun reporters in dramatic footage that was later posted online with subtitles by Turkey’s Cihan News Agency.

The conglomerate, which owns 22 companies, including two daily newspapers, <hl> Bugun and Millet <hl> , stands accused of ties to Fethullah Gulen, an Islamic cleric who lives in exile in Pennsylvania.


Question: Who is Bugun's editor in chief?

Answer: Tarik Toros

The conglomerate, which owns 22 companies, including two daily newspapers, Bugun and Millet, stands accused of ties to Fethullah Gulen, an Islamic cleric who lives in exile in Pennsylvania. Mr. Gulen’s followers were once allies of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s moderate Islamist party, but the government now considers them a shadowy underground network to be rooted out through purges of the police, the judiciary and the media. <hl> As the police forced camera crews outside the building to stop taking video, journalists retreated to the Bugun control room where Tarik Toros , the broadcaster’s editor in chief, fought the new trustees to keep the channel on the air as long as possible. <hl> That struggle was captured by Bugun reporters in dramatic footage that was later posted online with subtitles by Turkey’s Cihan News Agency.

The conglomerate, which owns 22 companies, including two daily newspapers, Bugun and Millet, stands accused of ties to Fethullah Gulen, an Islamic cleric who lives in exile in Pennsylvania. Mr. Gulen’s followers were once allies of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s moderate Islamist party, but the government now considers them a shadowy underground network to be rooted out through purges of the police, the judiciary and the media. As the police forced camera crews outside the building to stop taking video, journalists retreated to the Bugun control room where <hl> Tarik Toros <hl>, the broadcaster’s editor in chief, fought the new trustees to keep the channel on the air as long as possible. That struggle was captured by Bugun reporters in dramatic footage that was later posted online with subtitles by Turkey’s Cihan News Agency.

As the police forced camera crews outside the building to stop taking video, journalists retreated to the Bugun control room where <hl> Tarik Toros <hl> , the broadcaster’s editor in chief, fought the new trustees to keep the channel on the air as long as possible.


Question: Where was the struggle at the station later posted?

Answer: Cihan News Agency

The conglomerate, which owns 22 companies, including two daily newspapers, Bugun and Millet, stands accused of ties to Fethullah Gulen, an Islamic cleric who lives in exile in Pennsylvania. Mr. Gulen’s followers were once allies of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s moderate Islamist party, but the government now considers them a shadowy underground network to be rooted out through purges of the police, the judiciary and the media. As the police forced camera crews outside the building to stop taking video, journalists retreated to the Bugun control room where Tarik Toros, the broadcaster’s editor in chief, fought the new trustees to keep the channel on the air as long as possible. <hl> That struggle was captured by Bugun reporters in dramatic footage that was later posted online with subtitles by Turkey’s Cihan News Agency . <hl>

The conglomerate, which owns 22 companies, including two daily newspapers, Bugun and Millet, stands accused of ties to Fethullah Gulen, an Islamic cleric who lives in exile in Pennsylvania. Mr. Gulen’s followers were once allies of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s moderate Islamist party, but the government now considers them a shadowy underground network to be rooted out through purges of the police, the judiciary and the media. As the police forced camera crews outside the building to stop taking video, journalists retreated to the Bugun control room where Tarik Toros, the broadcaster’s editor in chief, fought the new trustees to keep the channel on the air as long as possible. That struggle was captured by Bugun reporters in dramatic footage that was later posted online with subtitles by Turkey’s <hl> Cihan News Agency <hl>.

That struggle was captured by Bugun reporters in dramatic footage that was later posted online with subtitles by Turkey’s <hl> Cihan News Agency <hl> .


Question: What platform did Suna Vidlinli report the channels disappearance from airwaves on?

In the end, both channels disappeared from the airwaves during a shared live broadcast on Wednesday afternoon, which Bugun’s Suna Vidinli reported on Twitter. By Wednesday night, reports from both Bugun and KanalTurk were blocked from viewers in the United States on YouTube. Mustafa Kilic, a journalist for one of the group’s newspapers, Millet, shared an image of blood on his press card, an apparent result of resisting the police during the raid. As Cihan reported, Bugun TV had “emerged as a main platform for opposition politicians over recent months.”

Answer: Twitter

<hl> In the end, both channels disappeared from the airwaves during a shared live broadcast on Wednesday afternoon, which Bugun’s Suna Vidinli reported on Twitter . <hl> By Wednesday night, reports from both Bugun and KanalTurk were blocked from viewers in the United States on YouTube. Mustafa Kilic, a journalist for one of the group’s newspapers, Millet, shared an image of blood on his press card, an apparent result of resisting the police during the raid. As Cihan reported, Bugun TV had “emerged as a main platform for opposition politicians over recent months.”

In the end, both channels disappeared from the airwaves during a shared live broadcast on Wednesday afternoon, which Bugun’s Suna Vidinli reported on <hl> Twitter <hl>. By Wednesday night, reports from both Bugun and KanalTurk were blocked from viewers in the United States on YouTube. Mustafa Kilic, a journalist for one of the group’s newspapers, Millet, shared an image of blood on his press card, an apparent result of resisting the police during the raid. As Cihan reported, Bugun TV had “emerged as a main platform for opposition politicians over recent months.”

In the end, both channels disappeared from the airwaves during a shared live broadcast on Wednesday afternoon, which Bugun’s Suna Vidinli reported on <hl> Twitter <hl> .


Question: What country were reports blocked in on Wednesday night?

Answer: United States

In the end, both channels disappeared from the airwaves during a shared live broadcast on Wednesday afternoon, which Bugun’s Suna Vidinli reported on Twitter. <hl> By Wednesday night, reports from both Bugun and KanalTurk were blocked from viewers in the United States on YouTube. <hl> Mustafa Kilic, a journalist for one of the group’s newspapers, Millet, shared an image of blood on his press card, an apparent result of resisting the police during the raid. As Cihan reported, Bugun TV had “emerged as a main platform for opposition politicians over recent months.”

In the end, both channels disappeared from the airwaves during a shared live broadcast on Wednesday afternoon, which Bugun’s Suna Vidinli reported on Twitter. By Wednesday night, reports from both Bugun and KanalTurk were blocked from viewers in the <hl> United States <hl> on YouTube. Mustafa Kilic, a journalist for one of the group’s newspapers, Millet, shared an image of blood on his press card, an apparent result of resisting the police during the raid. As Cihan reported, Bugun TV had “emerged as a main platform for opposition politicians over recent months.”


Question: When did the channels disappear from the airwaves?

Answer: Wednesday afternoon

<hl> In the end, both channels disappeared from the airwaves during a shared live broadcast on Wednesday afternoon , which Bugun’s Suna Vidinli reported on Twitter. <hl> By Wednesday night, reports from both Bugun and KanalTurk were blocked from viewers in the United States on YouTube. Mustafa Kilic, a journalist for one of the group’s newspapers, Millet, shared an image of blood on his press card, an apparent result of resisting the police during the raid. As Cihan reported, Bugun TV had “emerged as a main platform for opposition politicians over recent months.”

In the end, both channels disappeared from the airwaves during a shared live broadcast on <hl> Wednesday afternoon <hl>, which Bugun’s Suna Vidinli reported on Twitter. By Wednesday night, reports from both Bugun and KanalTurk were blocked from viewers in the United States on YouTube. Mustafa Kilic, a journalist for one of the group’s newspapers, Millet, shared an image of blood on his press card, an apparent result of resisting the police during the raid. As Cihan reported, Bugun TV had “emerged as a main platform for opposition politicians over recent months.”

In the end, both channels disappeared from the airwaves during a shared live broadcast on <hl> Wednesday afternoon <hl> , which Bugun’s Suna Vidinli reported on Twitter.


Question: What did Mustafa Kilic have on his press card?

Answer: blood

In the end, both channels disappeared from the airwaves during a shared live broadcast on Wednesday afternoon, which Bugun’s Suna Vidinli reported on Twitter. By Wednesday night, reports from both Bugun and KanalTurk were blocked from viewers in the United States on YouTube. <hl> Mustafa Kilic, a journalist for one of the group’s newspapers, Millet, shared an image of blood on his press card, an apparent result of resisting the police during the raid. <hl> As Cihan reported, Bugun TV had “emerged as a main platform for opposition politicians over recent months.”

In the end, both channels disappeared from the airwaves during a shared live broadcast on Wednesday afternoon, which Bugun’s Suna Vidinli reported on Twitter. By Wednesday night, reports from both Bugun and KanalTurk were blocked from viewers in the United States on YouTube. Mustafa Kilic, a journalist for one of the group’s newspapers, Millet, shared an image of <hl> blood <hl> on his press card, an apparent result of resisting the police during the raid. As Cihan reported, Bugun TV had “emerged as a main platform for opposition politicians over recent months.”


Question: Who was Bugun TV a main platform for over recent months?

Answer: opposition politicians

In the end, both channels disappeared from the airwaves during a shared live broadcast on Wednesday afternoon, which Bugun’s Suna Vidinli reported on Twitter. By Wednesday night, reports from both Bugun and KanalTurk were blocked from viewers in the United States on YouTube. Mustafa Kilic, a journalist for one of the group’s newspapers, Millet, shared an image of blood on his press card, an apparent result of resisting the police during the raid. <hl> As Cihan reported, Bugun TV had “emerged as a main platform for opposition politicians over recent months.” <hl>

In the end, both channels disappeared from the airwaves during a shared live broadcast on Wednesday afternoon, which Bugun’s Suna Vidinli reported on Twitter. By Wednesday night, reports from both Bugun and KanalTurk were blocked from viewers in the United States on YouTube. Mustafa Kilic, a journalist for one of the group’s newspapers, Millet, shared an image of blood on his press card, an apparent result of resisting the police during the raid. As Cihan reported, Bugun TV had “emerged as a main platform for <hl> opposition politicians <hl> over recent months.”


Question: Who was one of the final guest interviewed on Bugun TV?

One of the final guests interviewed in the Bugun TV studio during the raid was Selahattin Demirtas, the co-chairman of the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party, or H.D.P. Mr. Demirtas called the move to seize the media group “mafia-like” behavior by Mr. Erdogan’s party, which is known by its Turkish initials, A.K.P. On Wednesday night, Mr. Erdogan suddenly claimed on live television that the opposition H.D.P. campaign was secretly being run by President Obama’s election team. Although the accusation was widely mocked on social networks, it reached many Turkish ears unchallenged. The raid was condemned as an attack on press freedom by opposition politicians, rights groups and European diplomats.

Answer: Selahattin Demirtas

<hl> One of the final guests interviewed in the Bugun TV studio during the raid was Selahattin Demirtas , the co-chairman of the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party, or H.D.P. Mr. Demirtas called the move to seize the media group “mafia-like” behavior by Mr. Erdogan’s party, which is known by its Turkish initials, A.K.P. On Wednesday night, Mr. Erdogan suddenly claimed on live television that the opposition H.D.P. campaign was secretly being run by President Obama’s election team. <hl> Although the accusation was widely mocked on social networks, it reached many Turkish ears unchallenged. The raid was condemned as an attack on press freedom by opposition politicians, rights groups and European diplomats.

One of the final guests interviewed in the Bugun TV studio during the raid was <hl> Selahattin Demirtas <hl>, the co-chairman of the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party, or H.D.P. Mr. Demirtas called the move to seize the media group “mafia-like” behavior by Mr. Erdogan’s party, which is known by its Turkish initials, A.K.P. On Wednesday night, Mr. Erdogan suddenly claimed on live television that the opposition H.D.P. campaign was secretly being run by President Obama’s election team. Although the accusation was widely mocked on social networks, it reached many Turkish ears unchallenged. The raid was condemned as an attack on press freedom by opposition politicians, rights groups and European diplomats.

One of the final guests interviewed in the Bugun TV studio during the raid was <hl> Selahattin Demirtas <hl> , the co-chairman of the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party, or H.D.P. Mr. Demirtas called the move to seize the media group “mafia-like” behavior by Mr. Erdogan’s party, which is known by its Turkish initials, A.K.P. On Wednesday night, Mr. Erdogan suddenly claimed on live television that the opposition H.D.P. campaign was secretly being run by President Obama’s election team.


Question: What position did Selahattin Demirtas have on the H.D.P.?

Answer: co-chairman

<hl> One of the final guests interviewed in the Bugun TV studio during the raid was Selahattin Demirtas, the co-chairman of the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party, or H.D.P. Mr. Demirtas called the move to seize the media group “mafia-like” behavior by Mr. Erdogan’s party, which is known by its Turkish initials, A.K.P. <hl> On Wednesday night, Mr. Erdogan suddenly claimed on live television that the opposition H.D.P. campaign was secretly being run by President Obama’s election team. Although the accusation was widely mocked on social networks, it reached many Turkish ears unchallenged. The raid was condemned as an attack on press freedom by opposition politicians, rights groups and European diplomats.

One of the final guests interviewed in the Bugun TV studio during the raid was Selahattin Demirtas, the <hl> co-chairman <hl> of the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party, or H.D.P. Mr. Demirtas called the move to seize the media group “mafia-like” behavior by Mr. Erdogan’s party, which is known by its Turkish initials, A.K.P. On Wednesday night, Mr. Erdogan suddenly claimed on live television that the opposition H.D.P. campaign was secretly being run by President Obama’s election team. Although the accusation was widely mocked on social networks, it reached many Turkish ears unchallenged. The raid was condemned as an attack on press freedom by opposition politicians, rights groups and European diplomats.


Question: What are the initials of Erdogan's party?

Answer: A.K.P.

<hl> One of the final guests interviewed in the Bugun TV studio during the raid was Selahattin Demirtas, the co-chairman of the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party, or H.D.P. Mr. Demirtas called the move to seize the media group “mafia-like” behavior by Mr. Erdogan’s party, which is known by its Turkish initials, A.K.P. On Wednesday night, Mr. Erdogan suddenly claimed on live television that the opposition H.D.P. campaign was secretly being run by President Obama’s election team. <hl> Although the accusation was widely mocked on social networks, it reached many Turkish ears unchallenged. The raid was condemned as an attack on press freedom by opposition politicians, rights groups and European diplomats.

One of the final guests interviewed in the Bugun TV studio during the raid was Selahattin Demirtas, the co-chairman of the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party, or H.D.P. Mr. Demirtas called the move to seize the media group “mafia-like” behavior by Mr. Erdogan’s party, which is known by its Turkish initials, <hl> A.K.P. <hl> On Wednesday night, Mr. Erdogan suddenly claimed on live television that the opposition H.D.P. campaign was secretly being run by President Obama’s election team. Although the accusation was widely mocked on social networks, it reached many Turkish ears unchallenged. The raid was condemned as an attack on press freedom by opposition politicians, rights groups and European diplomats.


Question: Who did Erdogan claim was running the H.D.P. campaign?

Answer: President Obama’s election team

<hl> One of the final guests interviewed in the Bugun TV studio during the raid was Selahattin Demirtas, the co-chairman of the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party, or H.D.P. Mr. Demirtas called the move to seize the media group “mafia-like” behavior by Mr. Erdogan’s party, which is known by its Turkish initials, A.K.P. On Wednesday night, Mr. Erdogan suddenly claimed on live television that the opposition H.D.P. campaign was secretly being run by President Obama’s election team . <hl> Although the accusation was widely mocked on social networks, it reached many Turkish ears unchallenged. The raid was condemned as an attack on press freedom by opposition politicians, rights groups and European diplomats.

One of the final guests interviewed in the Bugun TV studio during the raid was Selahattin Demirtas, the co-chairman of the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party, or H.D.P. Mr. Demirtas called the move to seize the media group “mafia-like” behavior by Mr. Erdogan’s party, which is known by its Turkish initials, A.K.P. On Wednesday night, Mr. Erdogan suddenly claimed on live television that the opposition H.D.P. campaign was secretly being run by <hl> President Obama’s election team <hl>. Although the accusation was widely mocked on social networks, it reached many Turkish ears unchallenged. The raid was condemned as an attack on press freedom by opposition politicians, rights groups and European diplomats.

One of the final guests interviewed in the Bugun TV studio during the raid was Selahattin Demirtas, the co-chairman of the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party, or H.D.P. Mr. Demirtas called the move to seize the media group “mafia-like” behavior by Mr. Erdogan’s party, which is known by its Turkish initials, A.K.P. On Wednesday night, Mr. Erdogan suddenly claimed on live television that the opposition H.D.P. campaign was secretly being run by <hl> President Obama’s election team <hl> .


Question: What were the diplomats that condemned the raid?

Answer: European

One of the final guests interviewed in the Bugun TV studio during the raid was Selahattin Demirtas, the co-chairman of the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party, or H.D.P. Mr. Demirtas called the move to seize the media group “mafia-like” behavior by Mr. Erdogan’s party, which is known by its Turkish initials, A.K.P. On Wednesday night, Mr. Erdogan suddenly claimed on live television that the opposition H.D.P. campaign was secretly being run by President Obama’s election team. Although the accusation was widely mocked on social networks, it reached many Turkish ears unchallenged. <hl> The raid was condemned as an attack on press freedom by opposition politicians, rights groups and European diplomats. <hl>

One of the final guests interviewed in the Bugun TV studio during the raid was Selahattin Demirtas, the co-chairman of the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party, or H.D.P. Mr. Demirtas called the move to seize the media group “mafia-like” behavior by Mr. Erdogan’s party, which is known by its Turkish initials, A.K.P. On Wednesday night, Mr. Erdogan suddenly claimed on live television that the opposition H.D.P. campaign was secretly being run by President Obama’s election team. Although the accusation was widely mocked on social networks, it reached many Turkish ears unchallenged. The raid was condemned as an attack on press freedom by opposition politicians, rights groups and <hl> European <hl> diplomats.


Question: How old was the baby?

A baby girl, only a few minutes old, swaddled in a blanket or clothes, was breathing on the hood of a car in the Wakefield section of the Bronx. Inside a two-family home nearby, her 22-year-old mother lay on the floor in a pool of blood, fatally stabbed several times in her torso and neck, the authorities said. She had been close to nine months pregnant.

Answer: a few minutes old

<hl> A baby girl, only a few minutes old , swaddled in a blanket or clothes, was breathing on the hood of a car in the Wakefield section of the Bronx. <hl> Inside a two-family home nearby, her 22-year-old mother lay on the floor in a pool of blood, fatally stabbed several times in her torso and neck, the authorities said. She had been close to nine months pregnant.

A baby girl, only <hl> a few minutes old <hl>, swaddled in a blanket or clothes, was breathing on the hood of a car in the Wakefield section of the Bronx. Inside a two-family home nearby, her 22-year-old mother lay on the floor in a pool of blood, fatally stabbed several times in her torso and neck, the authorities said. She had been close to nine months pregnant.

A baby girl, only <hl> a few minutes old <hl> , swaddled in a blanket or clothes, was breathing on the hood of a car in the Wakefield section of the Bronx.


Question: What happened to the mother?

Answer: fatally stabbed

A baby girl, only a few minutes old, swaddled in a blanket or clothes, was breathing on the hood of a car in the Wakefield section of the Bronx. <hl> Inside a two-family home nearby, her 22-year-old mother lay on the floor in a pool of blood, fatally stabbed several times in her torso and neck <hl> , the authorities said. She had been close to nine months pregnant.

A baby girl, only a few minutes old, swaddled in a blanket or clothes, was breathing on the hood of a car in the Wakefield section of the Bronx. Inside a two-family home nearby, her 22-year-old mother lay on the floor in a pool of blood, <hl> fatally stabbed <hl> several times in her torso and neck, the authorities said. She had been close to nine months pregnant.


Question: How long was the mother expecting?

Answer: She had been close to nine months pregnant.

A baby girl, only a few minutes old, swaddled in a blanket or clothes, was breathing on the hood of a car in the Wakefield section of the Bronx. Inside a two-family home nearby, her 22-year-old mother lay on the floor in a pool of blood, fatally stabbed several times in her torso and neck, the authorities said. <hl> She had been close to nine months pregnant. <hl>


Question: Where was the baby found?

Answer: on the hood of a car

<hl> A baby girl, only a few minutes old, swaddled in a blanket or clothes, was breathing on the hood of a car in the Wakefield section of the Bronx. <hl> Inside a two-family home nearby, her 22-year-old mother lay on the floor in a pool of blood, fatally stabbed several times in her torso and neck, the authorities said. She had been close to nine months pregnant.

A baby girl, only a few minutes old, swaddled in a blanket or clothes, was breathing <hl> on the hood of a car <hl> in the Wakefield section of the Bronx. Inside a two-family home nearby, her 22-year-old mother lay on the floor in a pool of blood, fatally stabbed several times in her torso and neck, the authorities said. She had been close to nine months pregnant.