Film actress Gloria Swanson (1897-1983) and film director Cecil B DeMille (1881-1959) sitting together on the set of 'Sunset Boulevard,' a biting satire on Hollywood stardom in which DeMille plays himself, 1949.; Credit: Hulton Archive/Getty Images

Do you remember your first time? Your first time in Hollywood, that is.

That’s the theme of film historian Cari Beauchamp’s new book. In it she traces the paths of stars such as Mary Pickford, Gloria Swanson and Cecil B. DeMille. She also highlights the lesser sung heroes of Hollywood, whom you might not have heard of, like set decorator Winfrid Kay Thackrey, who was determined to persuade studios to hire a woman.

Their experiences are as wide-ranging as were their talents. Beauchamp reveals how screenwriter Ben Hecht recounted how his first day in 1926 Hollywood felt like “a year in Siberia,” but by all accounts paints a robust picture of a pioneering community fueled by its members’ streaks of serendipity.

Guest:

Cari Beauchamp, film historian and author of “My First Time in Hollywood: Stories from the Pioneers, Dreamers and Misfits Who Made the Movies” (Asahina & Wallace, 2015)

The Supreme Court ruled today that Texas was not at fault for refusing to issue a Confederate flag-themed license plate to a heritage group.

The Supreme Court ruled today that Texas was within its rights in refusing to issue a Confederate flag-themed license plate to a heritage group.

In 2013, the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles rejected the proposed plate and the Sons of Confederate Veterans sued calling it a violation of their free speech rights. Today’s decision was 5-4, with Justice Clarence Thomas joining the four liberal members of the court. The justices ruled that messages that appear on license plates are “government speech,” giving the state ultimate power to decide what can go on them.

WALKER, CHAIRMAN, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES BOARD, ET AL. v. TEXAS DIVISION, SONS OF CONFEDERATE VETERANS, INC., ET AL.

Guest:

David Savage, Supreme Court reporter for the Los Angeles Times. He wrote about the court’s decision for the publication today

"Warning: Do Not Feed The Trolls"

Social media backlash has recently impacted the resignations of biochemist Tim Hunt, who had some unsavory words about women in science and former NAACP leader Rachel Dolezal who claimed to be black despite having two white parents.

Where do we draw the line between expressing opinions and online abuse, or trolling? Author Whitney Phillips breaks down the troll phenomena in her latest, “This is Why We Can’t Have Nice Things: Mapping the Relationship Between Mainstream Media and Online Culture” (MIT Press, 2015).

Though anonymous users posting insensitive remarks on Facebook memorial pages, known as RIP trolling, or creating memes like Pedobear or Rape Sloth are obscene to many, she argues it’s not all that deviant. Trolls are simply an allegory of an entitled culture where dominance and success is gendered.

Phillips compares what trolls do online to what corporate media uses as a moneymaking strategy. Take for example, how President Obama was vilified during elections where his place of birth was in question. What trolls do outright, mainstream media does covertly.  

How do you respond to online trolling? Should more websites do more to prevent trolling or is it a necessary evil in our society?

Guest:

Whitney Phillips, Ph.D, author “This Is Why We Can’t Have Nice Things: Mapping the Relationship Between Mainstream Media and Online Culture” (MIT Press, 2015)

A woman looks at a piece of art entitled "Dollar Sign, 1981," an acrylic and silkscreen ink on canvas by US artist Andy Warhol, valued at 4-6 million British pounds (6-9 million US dollars, 5.4-8.2 million Euros) at Sotheby's auction house in London on June 8, 2015. ; Credit: ADRIAN DENNIS/AFP/Getty Images

Move over, Alexander Hamilton. A woman is coming to the $10 bill.

The U.S. Treasury Department has announced that it will be redesigning the $10 and release it in 2020 as a celebration of the 100th anniversary of the 19th amendment, which allowed women to vote.

Hamilton, whose face currently graces the front of the $10, will still appear on the bill somewhere, but a woman to be named will be the new, prominent face.

Who will that woman be? The final decision will be left up to U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew, but there is sure to be plenty of speculation leading up to that decision. Current federal law states that the chosen person must be dead, but the Treasury Department says Secretary Lew is looking for a woman “who was a champion for our inclusive democracy.”

Who do you think should be on the new $10 bill? What qualifies a person to be on U.S. currency? Is it a contribution to politics? Society? Civil/human rights?

Tweet @AirTalk using #TheNew10 with your suggestions. Also, vote on our Ranker below, and make sure to add anyone you think we missed!

Guest:

Matthew Whitman, assistant curator of American coins and currency at the American Numismatic Society

Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) (L) joins members of the US House of Representatives and members of the US Senate in a prayer circle in front of the US Capitol to honor those gunned down last night inside the historic Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston South Carolina, June 18, 2015 in Washington, DC. ; Credit: Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Dylann Storm Roof, the man suspected of killing nine people at a church in South Carolina, has been arrested.

Yesterday’s shooting at the historic Emmanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston left six women and three men dead, including the Reverend Clementa Pinckney. Investigators are trying to determine if the suspect had links to hate groups, particularly as the attack may have been a hate crime.

As more details come out, how have you responded to the shooting in Charleston? Will this have an effect on the national conversation surrounding gun violence? Can (and should) this crime be brought into a larger context about race relations in America?

Guests:

Chris Haire, Editor of the Charleston City Paper

Pastor J. Edgar Boyd, Senior Minister of the First African Methodist Episcopal Church of Los Angeles, a 142-year old institution

Charles Kurzman, teaches sociology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Kurzman co-wrote an opinion piece in The New York Times this week highlighting the threat posed by white supremacists, “The Other Terror Threat”

An english instruction sheet lies on a student's desk during a class in Lakeside California on Thursday, January 27, 2005. ; Credit: Sandy Huffaker/Getty Images

(AP) Statements that children make to teachers about possible abuse can be used as evidence, even if the child does not testify in court, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Thursday.

The ruling is expected to make it easier for prosecutors to convict people accused of domestic violence. The justices said that defendants don't have a constitutional right to cross-examine child accusers unless their statements to school officials were made for the primary purpose of creating evidence for prosecution.    

The case involves Darius Clark, a Cleveland man convicted of beating his girlfriend's 3-year-old son. Clark says the trial court denied him the constitutional right to confront his accuser when it said the boy didn't have to testify, but still considered statements he made to preschool teachers describing abuse.

The Supreme Court reversed a lower court and upheld Clark's conviction.

OHIO v. CLARK

Guests:

Joan Meier, Professor of Clinical Law at the George Washington University in D.C., with expertise on domestic violence and the law. She co-authored an amicus brief in support of the petitioner in the case

Richard Friedman, Professor of Law at the University of Michigan who wrote an amicus brief in support of the the respondent in the case

Vasakgel, a male birth control pill, could be on the market as early as 2018.; Credit: J.K. Califf/Flickr

In just a few years, men, too, could be on the pill.

Vasalgel is a reversible contraceptive for men being developed by The Parsemus Foundation, a nonprofit whose website says it “works to advance innovative and neglected medical research,” is developing the drug and says it has had success in animal testing. Human testing is expected to start next year and, assuming all goes to plan, could be on the market as early as 2018.

Vasalgel is used via injection and creates a polymer gel barrier in the vas deferens (the tube in the male genitalia through which sperm pass). It is similar to a vasectomy, a surgical procedure in which the vas deferens is snipped, but the idea is that Vasalgel could be reversed with another injection, if the user wanted to do so.

If you’re a man, would you ever consider using this drug? If you’re a woman, does this bring up trust issues for you (for example, believing a guy when he says he’s using Vasalgel or a similar male contraceptive)? What other male contraception options are being developed? How close are we to seeing some of these products for sale? How does this change the conversation and rhetoric around birth control, now that options exist for male contraceptives beyond condoms?

For more information on how Vasalgel works, take a look at this FAQ from The Parsemus Foundation. You can also learn more about the fundraising effort for male contraception here.

Guests:

Elaine Lissner, executive director of the Parsemus Foundation, which is developing Vasalgel, a male contraceptive that is designed to be similar to a vasectomy, but would be reversible.

Aaron Hamlin, executive director of the Male Contraception Initiative. He’s also a licensed attorney who has worked extensively in the nonprofit sector.

The characters of "Inside Out," Anger, Disgust, Joy, Fear and Sadness. ; Credit: Disney Pixar

Patt Morrison and KPCC film critics Lael Loewenstein, Andy Klein, and Charles Solomon review this week’s new releases including Pixar’s highly anticipated animated feature “Inside Out,” another Sundance darling, “Dope,” Mark Ruffalo as a father struggling with mental illness in “Infinitely Polar Bear,” and more. TGI-Filmweek!

Guests:

Andy Klein, film critic for KPCC and L.A. Times Community Paper Chain

Lael Loewenstein, film critic for KPCC and Variety

Charles Solomon, film critic for KPCC and Animation Scoop and Animation Magazine

Mark Ruffalo and Zoe Saldana in "Infinitely Polar Bear"; Credit: Sony Pictures Classics

The new film "Infinitely Polar Bear" starring Mark Ruffalo and Zoe Saldana has nothing to do with polar bears, but a lot to do with bipolar disorder.

It's a heart-warming memoir with edge based on the filmmakers' experience growing up with a dad diagnosed as manic-depressive (as it was labelled when we meet the character in the 1960s.)

It's the latest film this year to hone in closely on mental illness. Last month, Kristin Wiig was cast as lottery winner diagnosed with borderline personality disorder in the dramedy, "Welcome to Me." Plus "Love & Mercy," the biopic about the Beach Boys' Brian Wilson, was revelatory in its handling of Wilson's misdiagnoses, struggles with medication, the connections between art and madness, and his lifelong journey seeking solace.

Psychologist Danny Wedding has examined how Hollywood handles mental illness in four editions of his book, "Movies and Mental Illness: Using Films to Understand Psychopathology." Wedding says filmmakers are allowed to take artistic license, such as in "A Beautiful Mind" showing John Nash's hallucinations as visual rather than auditory, but that movies can benefit society's awareness.

Wedding perceives the trajectory of films moving in the right direction. What are his thoughts on the classic "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest?" What about absurdist comedies such as the Farrelly Brothers' "Me, Myself and Irene?" Which films do you think help or hurt our understanding of various mental disorders?

Guests:

Sylvester Amick-Alexis, Ambassador for Bring Change 2 Mind and lives with bipolar disorder

Mädchen Amick, Actress best known for her role as Shelly Johnson in the original Twin Peaks and in Showtime’s upcoming Twin Peaks; Ambassador for Bring Change 2 Mind - an advocacy group focused on eliminating stigmas about mental illness.

Danny Wedding, Psychologist and co-author of "Movies and Mental Illness: Using Films to Understand Psychopathology" in its fourth edition; and Chair of Behavioral Sciences at the American University of Antigua, a Caribbean medical school

People pay their respects outside Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina on June 18, 2015. Police captured the white suspect in a gun massacre at one of the oldest black churches in the United States, the latest deadly assault to feed simmering racial tensions.; Credit: MLADEN ANTONOV/AFP/Getty Images

Thursday night, a normally jocular Jon Stewart had no jokes to tell during his opening monologue on “The Daily Show.”

Instead, he was stoic and almost dejected as he went off script to talk about the shooting at a black church in Charleston, South Carolina that left nine dead.  “This is a terrorist attack,” he said. “I heard someone on the news say ‘tragedy has visited this church.’ This wasn’t a tornado. This was a racist.”

Poignant and timely as Stewart’s speech was, he took a very hard line in labeling what happened on Wednesday night an act of terrorism. Others see it differently, as a hate crime committed by a troubled, racist young man who targeted a very specific group of people that he didn’t like. “By calling the Charleston shooter a terrorist, by using and dignifying this buzzword of our day, by being hyperbolic in the news media, we dehumanize the act,” a Gizmodo writer says in an article posted yesterday.

How should we define what happened in Charleston? As a hate crime? As terrorism? Does it even matter how it’s labeled? Does this incident imply that a closer look is necessary at how we define the words ‘terrorism’ and ‘terrorist?’

Guests:

Bryan Burrough, special correspondent for Vanity Fair. His latest book is called “Days of Rage: America’s Radical Underground, the FBI, and the Forgotten Age of Revolutionary Violence

Deepa Iyer, is a senior fellow at The Center for Social Inclusion. Her book, “We Too Sing America; South Asian, Arab, Muslim and Sikh Immigrants Shape Our Multiracial Future,” is forthcoming in November from The New Press. Read her Al Jazeera piece on domestic terrorism.

People wait inline to enter the U.S. Supreme Court June 22, 2015 in Washington, DC. ; Credit: Mark Wilson/Getty Images

The Supreme Court today dealt a blow to L.A. law enforcement today, ruling that officers cannot inspect hotel and motel guest registries without a warrant.

The court’s decision was 5-4.

Under a city ordinance, hotels and motels are required to take down basic guest information. Law enforcement agencies say that illegal activities like prostitution and drug dealing run rampant in many budget hotels and motels and unannounced spot checks are necessary. But a group of hotel owners challenged the practice in court.

CITY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA v. PATEL ET AL.

Guests:

Richard Blass, a criminal defense attorney at the law firm, Richard F. Blass & Associates in Chicago. He is a retired Deputy Police Chief and is general counsel to a police union representing over 100 officers and chiefs

Ken Corney, Chief of Police of the Ventura Police Department; First Vice President of the California Police Chiefs Association

The new design for the Los Angeles Clippers

One of Los Angeles’ NBA teams will be sporting a new look on the court next year.

Last week, the Clippers rolled out a redesigned team logo and some new jerseys to go along with it. Team owner Steve Ballmer says it’s the next step in the franchise turning a corner and entering a new era.

Should the Clippers’ redesigned logo have featured more of a nod to the city of L.A. or the Clippers’ nautical team name? What are some of your favorite logos in professional sports history? How about the worst logos of all time? How much does a team’s look (logo, colors, jersey design, etc.) really matter to fans these days?

Guest:

Todd Radom, founder of Todd Radom Design. He is a graphic designer who creates logos for professional sports teams, including the MLB’s Washington Nationals and the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. He has also designed logos for major sporting events, including Super Bowl XXXVIII in 2004, the 2009 NBA All-Star Game in Phoenix, and the 2014 MLB All-Star Game in Minneapolis

Homeless women prepare for another day and night on the street near Skid Row in Los Angeles, California on May 12, 2015. A report released by the Los Angeles Homeless Authority on May 11 showed a 12% increase in the homeless population in both Los Angeles city and county, which according to the report have been driven by soaring rents, low wages and stubbornly high unemployment. One of the most striking findings from the biennial figures released saw the number of makeshift encampments, tents and vehicles occupied by the homeless increased 85%.; Credit: FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP/Getty Images

As the homeless population continues to rise in Southern California and encampments continue to pop up, so does the amount of stuff the homeless bring with them.

After a nearly unanimous vote at Tuesday’s City Council meeting, homeless people will have significantly less time to move their possessions after they’re told to clear out of an area. Two ordinances were given preliminary approval, one that covers parks and another that covers sidewalks. They would also let officials immediately take away bigger possessions like couches, chairs, and large tents.

The lone ‘nay’ vote came from District 1 Councilman Gil Cedillo, who told the L.A. Times that the strategy of criminalizing the homeless is clearly not working, and these ordinances simply continue to bolster that strategy.

What do you think about these ordinances? Where should the city draw the line between protecting the rights of homeless people and meeting the public’s demands for clean and safe public spaces?

Guests:

Gil Cedillo, Los Angeles City Councilmember representing District 1, which represents neighborhoods in northeast and northwest L.A. including Highland Park, Glassell Park, and Echo Park. He was the lone ‘nay’ vote at last Tuesday’s meeting on the two ordinances.

Rev. Andy Bales, CEO of Union Rescue Mission

Hundreds of people gather for a protest rally against the Confederate flag in Columbia, South Carolina on June 20, 2015. The racially divisive Confederate battle flag flew at full-mast despite others flying at half-staff in South Carolina after the killing of nine black people in an historic African-American church in Charleston on June 17. Dylann Roof, the 21-year-old white male suspected of carrying out the Emanuel African Episcopal Methodist Church bloodbath, was one of many southern Americans who identified with the 13-star saltire in red, white and blue. ; Credit: MLADEN ANTONOV/AFP/Getty Images

There has been a fluster of debate this week on whether South Carolina should take down the Confederate flag. This is in the wake of last week’s deadly shooting where known white supremacist Dylann Roof shot and killed 9 people at the  Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston.

A press conference is scheduled today at 4pm EST by South Carolina governor Nikki Haley who is expected to call on the South Carolina General Assembly to remove the Confederate flag from the north lawn of the South Carolina State House in downtown Columbia, South Carolina.

Guests:

Don Doyle, McCausland Professor of History at University of South Carolina and author of The Cause of All Nations: An International History of the American Civil War (Basic, 2015)

Christine Mai-Duc, Reporter for the LA Times

Yoni Abblebaum, Senior editor, politics for the Atlantic

A realtor sign is posted in front of a home for sale on May 28, 2013 in San Francisco, California. ; Credit: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Across the U.S., the housing market is continuing to rebound. The National Association of Realtors says first-time home buyers helped fuel housing sales in May to the highest rate in six years.

Here in Southern California, the market for buyers has also made a strong comeback in recent years, and while this has helped home prices continue to rise with demand,  there are some current concerns among market-watchers about the housing supply. Last month, the California Association of Realtors said that the low supply has a lot to do with homeowners choosing to stay up rather than start over as buyers, so homes that might otherwise go up on the market just aren’t there. High demand and low supply means higher prices for those looking to sell their homes, and while that’s good for people who can afford to be buyers again, it’s not so great for people like renters who are trying to save up for a down payment on a house but are struggling to keep their savings at pace with rising home prices.

Is now a good time to be looking to buy a house in Southern California, if you can afford it? What does the rest of 2015 hold for the real estate market? What are some of the market factors that will be at play for the remainder of the year as potential buyers look for homes? How is the Southern California housing market looking compared to a year ago? To two years ago?

Guests: 

Raphael Bostic, Judith and John Bedrosian Chair in Governance and the Public Enterprise at USC’s Price School of Public Policy

Stuart Gabriel, professor of finance and Arden Realty Chair at the UCLA Anderson School of Management and the director of the UCLA Ziman Center for Real Estate

Lyudmila Savchuk works on her laptop during an interview in Saint Petersburg on March 31, 2015. ; Credit: OLGA MALTSEVA/AFP/Getty Images

It’s not your imagination. A new report from job search site Glassdoor finds that companies are indeed taking longer to hire people.

Glassdoor interviewed over 340,000 employees in six countries and finds that in the U.S., the overall hiring process takes on average close to 23 days. The interview process now takes about 3 to 4 days.

What are the reasons behind the increase? Call and let us know about your experience, whether you are a jobseeker or a hiring manager.

Why Is Hiring Taking Longer?

Guest:

Scott Dobroski, career trends analyst at Glassdoor, , an employment trends website that recently released the study,  “Why is Hiring Taking Longer?”

The 2012 Nobel Economic Sciences Prizewinner US Alvin E Roth delivers a speech during the Nobel Banquet, a traditional dinner, after the Nobel Prize awarding ceremony at the Stockholm City Hall, on December 10, 2012.; Credit: JONATHAN NACKSTRAND/AFP/Getty Images

Markets define our world. But unless you are a highly trained economist and game theorist, understanding how we interact within them can be a challenge.

For example, take kidney transplants. There are 100,000 patients waiting for a kidney but only 17,000 transplants per year. What is the most efficient way to coordinate the transplant process? Considering the biological and logistical challenges of transporting organs across the country may seem insurmountable, and opportunity costs abound as emergency transports must be balanced with commercial travel.

Yet for those who study matchmaking and market design, such a challenge provides an opportunity. Kidney transplants can now be efficiently coordinated between four patients-donor pairs in four different cities. Schools with selective programs can now engage in matchmaking with students in a way that maximizes the preferences of both. Matchmaking in jobs and marriage has continued to improve.

What markets do you see operating in your life? To what extent should markets and matchmaking be regulated? And how should we influence the markets that comprise our world to determine who gets what - and why?

Guest:

Alvin E. Roth, Professor of Economics at Stanford University, Professor Emeritus at Harvard University, and 2012 Nobel Laureate in Economic Sciences for his work in market design. He is author of the new book, "Who Gets What - And Why" (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2015)

Care-carrying medical marijuana patients sample the brownies at Los Angeles' first-ever cannabis farmer's market at the West Coast Collective medical marijuana dispensary, on the fourth of July, or Independence Day, in Los Angeles, California on July 4, 2014 where organizer's of the 3-day event plan to showcase high quality cannabis from growers and vendors throughout the state. ; Credit: FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP/Getty Images

A comprehensive analysis of 79 studies published today in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) has shown weak evidence that medical marijuana is effective in treating a variety of ailments, such as hepatitis C, Crohn disease, and Parkinson disease.

The studies involved over 6,000 patients and covered illnesses from anxiety and sleep disorder to multiple sclerosis and Tourette’s syndrome. The experts in JAMA say there is some evidence to support the use of marijuana for nausea and vomiting related to chemotherapy, specific pain syndromes, and spasticity from multiple sclerosis. Twenty-three states and Washington D.C. have legalized marijuana for medical use despite the federal government’s classification of it as a Schedule I controlled substance. Approved conditions vary from state to state, including conditions as varied as Alzheimer’s disease and kidney disease.

One of the studies looked at the efficacy of edibles, the majority of which were determined to have improperly labeled THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) content.

Because evidence from high-quality studies is lacking, the editorial in the recommendations encourages federal and state governments to support such research.

Will this analysis stymie medical marijuana in California? What effect will it have on other states considering medical marijuana legislation? To what extent will this open up future research on the subject?

Medical Marijuana: Is the Cart Before the Horse?

Guests:

Dr. Mohini Ranganathan, M.D., (F)  (MOH-hee-nee  rahng-ah-NAH-then), Editorial Co-Writer of “Medical Marijuana: Is the Cart Before the Horse?”;  Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine

Christopher W. Brown, Press Secretary, Americans for Safe Access - its mission is to ensure safe and legal access to cannabis (marijuana) for therapeutic uses and research

A homeless encampment in downtown Los Angeles. ; Credit: Robin Kanouse/Flickr

For the first time in a long time, the city of Los Angeles could see major homeless sweeps.

Two new ordinances passed at Tuesday night’s City Council meeting, one for streets and sidewalks and the other for parks, will shorten the time homeless people have to clear out their belongings after being asked to move from 72 hours to 24. Authorities will be able to clear out larger items like mattresses, sofas, and large tents, without warning. A current court order allows the homeless to sleep on the streets from 9 p.m. until 6 a.m., but they must take down their tents during the day.

The new laws will go into effect once the city clerk signs and publishes them. Council President Herb Wesson says the council will also be taking up amendments that would remove medications and personal documents from the list of things that authorities could confiscate and get rid of a criminal penalty for violations.

How effective will the new ordinances be at reducing the number of large homeless encampments in the city? Is 24 hours a fair amount of time to ask someone to clear out his or her belongings? If you disagree with the city’s solution to the problem, what would you propose as an alternative?

Guests:

Carol Sobel, a civil rights attorney who has represented L.A.'s homeless in federal courts

Carol Schatz, president and CEO of the Central City Association

The Justices of the US Supreme Court sit for their official photograph on October 8, 2010 at the Supreme Court in Washington, DC.; Credit: TIM SLOAN/AFP/Getty Images

A recent initiative is calling on the next nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court to pledge to serve a single term of just 18 years.

The group, which calls itself Come to Terms, is a project of the Supreme Court watchdog Fix the Court and it cites the court’s increased partisan decision-making and timing of retirements from the bench; longer than expected tenures that render some justices out of touch with everyday Americans; and lack of professional diversity and real-world experience as significant reasons for change. Do you agree?

Guests:

Gabe Roth, Executive Director of Fix the Court, an organization that wants to make the Supreme Court more transparent through a series of reforms

Russell Wheeler, Visiting Fellow, Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution. He is an expert on U.S. courts and selection of judges