You are a person fact-checking the outputs of automatic summarization models (such as BART, T5, etc.). Summarization models are known to produce summaries that are not always factually consistent with the news article they summarize. For example, the models sometimes hallucinate unmentioned facts, or misrepresent the facts in the article, or introduce other factual mistakes.  A summary is factually consistent if all the facts it gives are also explicitly mentioned in the news article. For the article and summary below, your task is to confirm (Yes/No) whether the summary is factually consistent with the article.

News Article:
NAME_1: Okay, round two. Retail Jedi! . NAME_2: Marketing. . NAME_3: Shop assistant! . NAME_1: You're right! It's a shop assistant! . NAME_2: NAME_4. 1:1. . NAME_1: Don't worry, NAME_5, you'll get your chance! Round three: Wet Leisure Attendant! . NAME_3: This has to be a pimp! I'm sure of it! . NAME_2: A masseuse! . NAME_1: Sorry, guys. No points this time! It's a lifeguard. . NAME_3: You've got to be kidding me! . NAME_2: Lol . NAME_1: Okay, round four: Colour Distribution Technician! . NAME_3: Easy! Painter. . NAME_2: Not so fast! Decorator! . NAME_1: I see ur getting the hang of it! Both answers correct! Point each.

Summary:
1. The speakers are attempting to guess the job associated with a given title.
2. They correctly guess "shop assistant" and "colour distribution technician", but inaccurately guess "pimp" and "masseuse".

Is the summary factually consistent with the article? ( Please answer in JSON format.
user