Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers keyboardist Benmont Tench III lumbers into the back of John's car to record his song "Like the Sun (Michoacan)".; Credit: John Rabe/KPCC

Los Angeles has many cultural institutions and one of them is KPCC’s Off-Ramp.

After close to 11 years, the best radio show on Southern California is coming to a close. Host John Rabe and his crew of producers and interns have been bringing thousands of quirky, hilarious, heartbreaking stories of this place to audiences.

AirTalk guest host Libby Denkmann celebrates Off-Ramp with John and his producers.

The final episode of Off-Ramp is airing this Saturday, July 1, at 1:00pm, and Sunday, July 2, at 6pm. 

Guests:

John Rabe, host of Off-Ramp and KPCC’s incoming Production and Promotions Director

Queena Kim, founding Off-Ramp producer; senior editor at the NPR-affiliate KQED in the Bay Area; she tweets @queenasookkim

Kevin Ferguson, former Off-Ramp producer; producer for “Bulleyes with Jesse Thorn;” he tweets @KevinFerguson

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

People arrive at John F. Kennedy (JFK) international airport following an announcement by the Supreme Court that it will take President Donald Trump's travel ban case later in the year.; Credit: Spencer Platt/Getty Images

The revised travel ban against foreign visitors from six mostly Muslim countries will go into effect 5 p.m. Pacific on Thursday.

As reported by the New York Times, the Supreme Court’s decision to partially implement the ban will enable people with “a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States.” The words “bona fide relationship” have left some wondering where the line will be drawn to enter the country. One thing we do know is that it includes “close family.” That means parents, parents-in-law, spouses, children, adult sons and daughters, sons and daughters-in-law and whole or half siblings.

Foreigners from the listed countries may also enter if they have accepted a job offer from an American company in the U.S., a hotel reservation and those attending a university. Now, questions remain around what will happen at airports, and what legal help refugees will need to enter the U.S. Guest host Libby Denkmann speaks to legal experts to find out what you need to know about the revised ban.

Guests:

Nicholas Espiritu, LA-based staff attorney at the National Immigration Law Center; he is one of the litigators in one of the travel ban cases, International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, in the Fourth Circuit; he tweets @NicoEspiritu9

James Copland, director of legal policy and senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute; he tweets @JamesRCopland

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

California Governor-elect Jerry Brown speaks during a press conference at his campaign headquarters on November 3, 2010 in Oakland, California. ; Credit: David Paul Morris/Getty Images

Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation yesterday to break up the California Board of Equalization, a unique, obscure and powerful state agency that’s been handling our taxes and hearing tax appeals for almost 140 years.

In and out of hot water for several decades - including a current Department of Justice investigation and a damning audit out earlier this year that accused BOE employees of putting $350 million in sales tax in the wrong accounts and other “mismanagement” - the state legislature and the government agree the BOE needs major changes. With Brown’s signature to break up the board - more than 90 percent of the 4,800 BOE employees will transfer to other agencies, including a new one - the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration. That is, if the state government can get the new agency up and running by the July 1 deadline.

A second new department, the Office of Tax Appeals will be created by January 1. It will take over the tax court run by the BOE. As for the original agency? It’s not completely dead. The Board of Equalization still has responsibilities that are defined in the State Constitution - those aren’t changeable by new legislation.

Guest:

Dan Walters, long-time CA politics observer with CALmatters, a nonprofit public interest publication

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

California State Senator Alex Padilla speaks with KPCC's Patt Morrison in Charlotte, North Carolina on September 4, 2012.

President Trump’s Election Integrity Commission asked all 50 states for their voter data, including names, addresses and the last four Social Security numbers of registered voters.

Thursday, Secretary of State Alex Padilla denied the request, saying it would only bolster illegitimate claims of voter fraud.

Guest host Libby Denkmann sat down with California Secretary of State Alex Padilla to discuss the latest.

Interview highlights:

President Trump’s Election Integrity Commission sent a letter yesterday to you and 49 other secretaries of state. What did the letter ask?

PADILLA: The letter starts off in an innocuous way: What suggestions do you have running elections in the United States of America? 

But here’s the troubling part, they also want a data transfer. They want data on every registered voter in California. And we are not just talking about names and phone numbers, by the way: names, dates of birth, the last four digits of your social security, complete vote history, party affiliation, on and on and on.

A lot of this information just isn’t public information for anybody. I have serious concerns, not just about this request, but about the commission fundamentally.

Here’s the big picture, we know the president is still upset that he lost the popular vote last November. Despite his claim of massive voter fraud to the tune of millions in the state of California, they have no evidence of that. Study after study and investigation after investigation shows that [voter fraud] is exceedingly rare. . . This is their first action to put out a voter information request for personal information on every voter of America, I think it’s an overreach and I don’t exactly trust the process. 

What was your official response to the letter? 

PADILLA: They gave us until July 14th to respond and provide data. I just don’t know how to do it with any sort of confidence. They are asking for personal information from voters across America, especially from California, the most populous state, with no transparency on their end.

The [Election Integrity Commission] has been formed, and the co-chair by the way, Kris Kobach from Kansas, is somebody with a long history of supporting discriminatory policies, anti-immigrant policies and voter suppression efforts across the country. . .

As far as a formal response, I’d like to suggest that if they are genuine about maintaining the integrity of elections in America, number one: please acknowledged that the Russians interfered with the election, and act on that. The president has yet to do so. Number two: follow the advice from the last commission that was formed. When President Obama was re-elected in 2012, there was a bi-partisan commission with true respected experts. They came together and offered advice on what can we do to improve elections. Chief among that advice? Invest in new voting equipment.

We need new systems that embrace new technologies to better secure our elections. Everything we use in California today is 15 to 20 years old. It’s the age of that equipment that’s probably the biggest threat. 

To be clear, you will not at this point participate with the request? Is there anything they can do to compel you to give this data to the federal government?

PADILLA: I could not in good conscience agree with the request thus far. This advisory commission is exactly that, it is advisory. The letter they sent us is a request, it is certainly not a Freedom of Information Act request by any means, and it’s not clear what grounds of authority [the commission has] to make this kind of request and to handle this kind of data--data we know it’s sensitive, and personal. 

Moving on to Russian Hacking. There were a pair of hearings on Capitol Hill last week. Some lawmakers discussed Russian cyber attacks on American soil by using an American voting system. Many Homeland Security and FBI officials testified before the Senate Intel Committee. One official confirmed that 21 states experience cyber probing of election infrastructure. Do we know for sure that California is among one of those states?

PADILLA: There’s zero evidence that elections here in California were compromised. We have done check after check to verify whether there was any irregular activity. Even though California isn't on the list, I can’t take it for granted.

The Russians may not have been successful this last go-around, but as former FBI Director Comey said in his testimony “they are going to keep coming. They are going to learn what they learned in 2016, and they are going to try [to hack] future elections.” We have to stay vigilant. We have to constantly be as prepared as possible to defend the integrity of our election. 

The head of the National Association of Secretaries of State Connie Lawson testified that there hasn’t been enough communication with the Department of Homeland Security and secretaries of state about potential cyber attacks. It seems that DHS, during the hearings, would not confirm who the 21 states were. Do you worry at all that there’s information about California that’s not being shared with you at the state-level and with other secretaries of states? 

PADILLA: That is certainly a concern. The whole premise behind the creation of the Election Infrastructure Cybersecurity Working Group within the Department of Homeland Security came last fall when initial chatter of hacking or election rigging came about. And it was followed up by DHS in January designating elections as a critical infrastructure. We spoke earlier about state running elections, not the federal government. There has been state concern about what this federal rule could potentially mean for election security.

There’s potentially value added from this partnership if we are just exchanging best technology practices. But sharing information, that’s what’s so vital when it comes to homeland security and cyber security. That’s the premise behind the working group. And unfortunately, we come to learn through leaked NSA memos that there was information available to them that was not shared on a timely basis with state election officials who are on the front line defending elections. We go back to the checks, reviews, and audits since the election and feel very confident about what happened in 2016. We can learn from that experience and better strengthen ourselves in 2018 and beyond. 

*This interview has been edited for clarity

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

A man rides his bike along a controversial bike lane on Prospect Park West on August 17, 2011 in the Brooklyn borough of New York City.; Credit: Spencer Platt/Getty Images

The city of Los Angeles' ambitious program to reverse a rising trend of traffic deaths and eliminate road fatalities by 2025 is having unintended consequences in communities sensitive to increased traffic enforcement and mistrustful of street improvements seen as signs of gentrification.

Los Angeles embraced an international initiative to cut traffic fatalities started in Sweden called Vision Zero as it tries to grapple with traffic crash fatalities that have risen by 43 percent between 2015 and 2016. With an average 6.27 traffic deaths per 100,000 residents each year, L.A. has the highest traffic death rate of any major city in the country. Last year, 260 people died in L.A. street crashes, about 30 fewer than died in homicides in the city in 2016.

Read full story

Guests:

Meghan McCarty Carino, KPCC reporter covering commuting and mobility issues. She tweets @meghamama

Erick Huerta, a member of Multicultural Communities For Mobility, a Boyle Heights organization that focuses on making LA communities more walkable, as well as more bike- and public transit-friendly. He tweets @ElRandomHero 

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

A Syrian man reacts while standing on the rubble of his house while others look for survivors and bodies in the Tariq al-Bab district of the northern city of Aleppo.; Credit: AFP/AFP/Getty Images

On Monday, U.S. officials said they got intelligence forewarning a chemical strike by the Syrian military, and warned Assad that he would face consequences if the attack was carried out.

The lack of attack led U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis to say that Syria had taken the U.S. warning seriously, though it’s unclear if the attack was imminent.

Meanwhile on Wednesday, Russia, which backs the Syrian government in the civil war, warned the U.S. that it would fire back on U.S. interference with Assad. Earlier, the Russian Defense Ministry said it would potentially target U.S. jets flying over certain parts of Syria. And a Russian jet did fly within 5 feet of a U.S. recon aircraft last week, which was perceived to be a warning.

Did the U.S. have intelligence of a coming chemical attack by Assad? How does our intel asses potential chemical attacks? And what’s happening with U.S.-Russia relations, via Syria?

Guest:

Aaron David Miller, Vice President for New Initiatives at the Wilson Center and former advisor to Republican and Democratic Secretaries of State on Arab-Israeli negotiations, 1978-2003. He tweets @aarondmiller2

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

With President Trump displayed on a television monitor, members of the House Democratic conference hold a press conference concerning President Donald Trump's controversial tweets, on Capitol Hill, June 29, 2017 in Washington, DC. ; Credit: Drew Angerer/Getty Images

President Trump’s propensity to air his grievances over Twitter has again landed him in the spotlight.

This time, it’s over a tweet he fired off against CNN, which contains a doctored GIF showing Trump slamming a figure whose head has been replaced by the news network’s logo in a wrestling match.

Critics say that the tweet is an endorsement of violence against the press? What do you think?

#FraudNewsCNN#FNNpic.twitter.com/WYUnHjjUjg

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 2, 2017

​We’ll also discuss the Senate’s next steps in its effort to replace the Affordable Care Act. And, AirTalk wants to hear from listeners on how they plan to navigate the tricky terrain of the July 4th barbecue with politics so much on the forefront of everyone’s minds.

Guest host Libby Denkmann in for Larry Mantle

Guests:

Sean T. Walsh, Republican political analyst and partner at Wilson Walsh Consulting in San Francisco; he is a former adviser to California Governors Pete Wilson and Arnold Schwarzenegger and a former White House staffer for Presidents Reagan and H.W. Bush

Caroline Heldman, associate professor of politics at Occidental College and author of the forthcoming book, “Protest Politics in the Marketplace: Consumer Activism in the Corporate Age” (Cornell University Press, 2017); she tweets @carolineheldman

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

A laptop displays a message after being infected by a ransomware as part of a worldwide cyberattack on June 27, 2017. ; Credit: ROB ENGELAAR/AFP/Getty Images

Last week, cyber virus Petya spread from Ukraine to Europe and parts of the U.S., as well as Asia and South America, taking down thousands of computers and disrupting ports from Long Beach to Australia.

NATO said the attack was likely state-backed, meaning it could be seen as an act of war, which would trigger Article 5, the principle of common defense.

This ransomware exploited the same security flaw as the WannaCry attack in May, which locked up computers in British hospitals, before a 22-year old computer security researcher found a kill switch in the code.

That researcher is part of Kryptos Logic, a small cybersecurity company based here in Los Angeles, and co-founded by Salim Neino. For Neino, these attacks didn’t come as a surprise. He believes they’re a bellwether and he’s urging lawmakers to prepare themselves. After the WannaCry attack, he testified before Congress and proposed a “Richter scale” to prioritize cyber threats and help companies create the necessary structures to ward off future attacks.  

Guest host Libby Denkmann sits down with Neino to discuss the future of cyber security. What have we learned from these recent ransomware attacks? And what can we do to protect ourselves in the future?

Guest:

Salim Neino, CEO  and co-founder of Kryptos Logic, a cybersecurity company based in Los Angeles; one of their researchers found the kill switch for the WannaCry ransomware attack in May

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin speaks to reporters at the Trump Tower in New York.; Credit: JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images

Last week, House Representatives Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles) and Al Green (D-Texas) launched an investigation on Trump’s dealings with OneWest Bank. 

The Pasadena-based financial institution was headed by the current Treasury Secretary Steven T. Mnuchin. “There’s room for considerable doubt as to the impartiality and the adequacy of this administration’s investigations into this administration’s investigations into OneWest,” said the two House Democrats. Guest Host Libby Denkmann sits down with Jim Puzzanghera, business reporter for the LA Times, on the role of OneWest Bank in the Trump administration.

Guest:

Jim Puzzanghera, business reporter for the LA Times, D.C. bureau; he tweets@JimPuzzangher

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Actors Ryan Reynolds (L) and Blake Lively pose with their daughters as Ryan Reynolds is honored with star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame on December 15, 2016 in Hollywood, California.; Credit: Matt Winkelmeyer/Getty Images

Last week, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences made a big jump to include women filmmakers in its exclusive Hollywood club, according to a report by the Los Angeles Times.

The invitations are an important step in increasing female recognition at the Oscars every year, but don't touch on the overall lack of women working in Hollywood. Though gender discrimination in hiring practices is an issue, a recent op-ed in the Los Angeles Times argues Hollywood could fix its gender disparity by implementing a more parent-friendly work culture.

By providing childcare services to parents while they work long hours, the op-ed argues, Hollywood would not only keep more mothers in the industry – they would also open the door for mothers who can’t afford the expensive cost of childcare to become involved. This idea has been successful in companies outside of Hollywood; Patagonia, which provides on-site childcare, has a 100 percent retention rate of mothers.

If you’re a parent in the entertainment industry, do you feel like the industry is unfriendly to parents? Do you think on-site childcare or shorter workdays would help? And for parents working outside of the industry – how does your company treat the needs of parenthood?

Guest:

Mathilde Dratwa, filmmaker and founder of the nonprofit Moms-In-Film; her op-ed “Hollywood's gender problem is really a mom problem” was published in the LA Times last week

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

A worker climbs on a cellular communication tower on March 6, 2014 in Oakland, California. ; Credit: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

More cell towers in exchange for better service and lower rates? That’s the idea behind a new bill in the state legislature, SB 649.

Opponents say the legislation is a financial boon for telecommunication companies and would strip local governments of their power over cell tower installation. Currently, companies that want to install a cell tower lease the land from the city, which has control over the placement and aesthetic of the tower. Depending on what the local government charges, the lease for just one antenna site can cost up to $3,000. SB 649 would turn the lease into an annual administrative fee of $250. It would also allow telecommunications companies to put up towers without public input - meaning a tower could show up in front of your house and the city wouldn’t be able to stop it.

Proponents say this would be benefit California’s technological advancement and reduce phone bills by eliminating overhead for telecommunication companies. They say local governments are actually reticent to lose lease money, even if it would mean lower phone bills for constituents.  

Should telecommunications companies have more freedom to build towers? What would be the benefits and drawbacks for constituents?

Guests:

Kish Rajan, chief evangelist for CALinnovates, a technology advocacy coalition that includes telecommunication companies  

Don Saylor, Yolo County Supervisor representing District 2, which includes the cities of Winters and Davis, the UC Davis campus and farmland in the southwestern portion of Yolo County

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

A picture taken on October 17, 2016 shows an employee typing on a computer keyboard at the headquarters of Internet security giant Kaspersky in Moscow.; Credit: KIRILL KUDRYAVTSEV/AFP/Getty Images

More than 43 million adult Americans suffer from mental illness, but fewer than half reported receiving help.

That’s according to a 2015 survey by the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. A portion of these untreated cannot afford professional guidance, while some lack access to quality healthcare. And for some, there still stigma attached to seeking therapy.

As reported by Capital and Main and Fast Company, there’s recently been an increase in online therapy that claims to fill the void of traditional office visits. But is online counseling just as effective as an in-person session? Does the treatment depend on the condition of the mental health issue? Larry speaks to two clinical psychologists about the pros and cons of seeing a virtual therapist.

Guests:

Sonya Bruner, Psy.D., licensed clinical psychologist and clinical director of BetterHelp.com, a California-based online counseling website

Todd Essig, Ph.D., clinical psychologist practicing in New York City and training and supervising psychoanalyst at William Alanson White Institute of Psychiatry; he is also a contributor at Forbes where he writes Managing Mental Wealth, a mental health column; he tweets @ToddEssig

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

California Governor Jerry Brown signs landmark legislation SB 3 into law on April 4, 2016 in Los Angeles, California. ; Credit: David McNew/Getty Images

The minimum wage has gone up in Los Angeles County. Business owners with 26 or more employees in Los Angeles, Pasadena, Santa Monica, and the unincorporated parts of L.A. County are now required to pay their employees $12 an hour (up from $10.50).

Businesses with 25 or fewer employees have to pay $10.50 (up from $10 an hour).

It's just the beginning of minimum wage fever throughout California. The state's minimum wage will rise to $11 an hour in January and will steadily increase each year till it hits $15 an hour in 2022.

Host Larry Mantle takes your calls on your thoughts on the impact of the new minimum wage. How is this going to affect those looking for entry-level positions? If you are a business owner, how have you prepared for the new minimum wage at $12 an hour?

Call 866-893-5252 and share your thoughts.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un (C) celebrating the successful test-fire of the intercontinental ballistic missile Hwasong-14 at an undisclosed location.; Credit: STR/AFP/Getty Images

On July 4, North Korea successfully tested an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) which flew about 580 miles and reached an altitude of nearly 1,741 miles, according to the state media, meaning it had the capacity to reach Alaska. 

So what now? Options range from diplomacy, sanctions and pressure from China to military action. Each route poses its own problems and consequences.

How are the U.S. and China approaching the situation? What is the magnitude of the threat and the potential for escalation? What options does the U.S. have  and what are their possible repercussions?

Guests:

Jim Walsh, Ph.D., International security expert and a Research Associate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Security Studies Program; he tweets @DrJimWalshMIT

Fred Fleitz, former CIA analyst (1986-2005) and senior vice president at the Center for Security Policy, a conservative think tank in Washington D.C.; he tweets @FredFleitz ‏

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

One of two pro-gun activists protests against the Gun Buyback Program organized in the traditionally liberal Los Angeles during the LAPD Gun Buyback Program event.; Credit: JOE KLAMAR/AFP/Getty Images

California and its gun laws have been making national news in the last week.

First, with the Supreme Court decision not to take on a case that looks into concealed carry reciprocity and our state’s limits on who can carry a gun in public. Then on Thursday a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction to block the disposal of large-capacity ammunition magazines in California. The law was supposed to go into effect this weekend.

How are gun rights advocates and gun control supporters reacting to the news? What’s next for these policies? And what else could be coming down the pipeline in the national and state-wide gun conversation?

Guests:

Lawrence Rosenthal, professor of law at Chapman University in Orange, California

Josh Blackman, an associate professor of Law at the South Texas College of Law who specializes in constitutional law; he is the author of “Unprecedented: The Constitutional Challenge to Obamacare” (Public Affairs, 2013); he tweets @JoshMBlackman

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Melissa Soto cuddles with a therapy dog near a memorial for the victims of the Pulse Nightclub shooting, at the Dr. Phillips Center for Performing Arts, June 14, 2016 in Orlando, Florida.; Credit: Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Humans and animals have long had close and comforting relationships – but does that mean our critter companions are scientifically helpful therapy tools?

A Washington Post article published this week explores what’s already out there, and what’s still missing, in terms of research regarding the efficacy of therapy animals (not to be confused with service animals like seeing-eye dogs).

As we see more and more animals in the workplace, inside restaurants and brought onto airplanes for their comforting presence, how are different companies and businesses responding? Are people abusing the title “therapy animal” so they can take their pets everywhere? Are there risks in using therapy animals before there is clear scientific evidence of their benefits? What if we find out animals aren’t especially therapeutic after all?

Guests:

Hal Herzog, Western Carolina University psychologist; he has studied human-animal interactions for more than twenty years

Alan Beck, director of the Center of the Human-Animal Bond at Purdue University

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

A motorist drives between flowers as a heavy wildflower bloom, the result of last winter's record rainfall, continues on the first day of summer along the Angeles Crest Highway on June 21, 2005.; Credit: David McNew/Getty Images

The summer of 2017 is underway and with the recent heat wave here in the southwest jacking temperatures so high that planes can’t take off in some places, why not skip the airport security lines and take a good old-fashioned road trip this summer.

They’re great opportunities to bond with your fellow road-trippers, see places in the country you wouldn’t see otherwise, and you might even save a little money in the process. Plus, no matter what happens while you’re out on the open road, there’s almost always a story to tell everyone when you get back.

Today on AirTalk, we want to hear your past road trip stories, good and bad. Maybe it was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity that turned into an unforgettable vacation. Maybe it was a trip that seemed like a great idea at the time and turned into a nightmare. Maybe you’ve got big plans for a trip this summer.

Larry and his family have just concluded a cross-country road trip and has tons of stories to share. He also wants to hear your tales from the road. Call us at 866-893-5722.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Woman plays with her new-born baby at a maternity hospital.
; Credit: ALEKSEY FILIPPOV/AFP/Getty Images

U.S. fertility rates have hit a historic low.

That’s according to The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s 2016 provisional population data. The numbers showed that there were only 62 births per 1,000 women ages 15 to 44. As reported in the Washington Post, the decline is due lower birth rates for teens and women in their early 20s.

With less teen pregnancy, and more access to health education and health care, this should be good news, right? Some economists disagree. With less population comes less labor force, and eventually more aging people without young relatives to care for them. In theory, this would lead to more cost to care for the elderly over time.

But some argue low birth rates could also boost the economy, giving women more time to focus on their careers and maintain finances. What do you think? Would lower birth rates help or hurt the economy?

Guests:

Ross DeVol, chief research officer at the Milken Institute; his research interests include population growth and labor force dynamics  

John Townsend, Ph.D., director of the Reproductive Health Program at the Population Council, a nonprofit organization; the council’s focus includes conducting research on contraceptive technologies and family planning

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

New York Police Department (NYPD) Officer Joshua Jones wears a body camera during a mock traffic stop to demonstrate how the cameras will be used during a press conference.; Credit: Andrew Burton/Getty Images

The ongoing debate over the release of police video is being taken up by the state legislature.

According to the Los Angeles Times, a new bill would require law enforcement in CA to release video from police shootings and protests. The issue pits individual privacy against transparency – police and prosecutors say making videos public early on could compromise investigations. There are also privacy concerns about members of the public being shown during highly traumatic experiences.

AirTalk looks at whether the rules on police videos can be standardized.

Guests:

Cory M. Salzillo, legislative director for the California State Sheriffs’ Association

Adrienna Wong, staff attorney at the ACLU of Southern California

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

The stage is set for the Republican presidential debate, hosted by CNN, at The Venetian hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada, December 15, 2015.; Credit: L.E. BASKOW/AFP/Getty Images

The viral video of President Trump wrestling a doctored “CNN” opponent is at the center of another story – this time with CNN in the hot seat.

The news organization released a story earlier this week on the anonymous Reddit user who created the video, but decided not to give out his name on a few conditions. As reported by the New York Times, CNN identified the video creator as a “private citizen” and would not reveal his identity, but only if certain things about his behavior did not change.

The anonymous source of the video had reportedly issued a statement of apology, and displayed remorse, taking down racist, anti-Semitic and other offensive posts. The CNN story went on with the following condition, “CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change.”

So what are the implications of unnamed sources? Larry speaks to two media ethicists on whether this oversteps the bounds of journalistic ethics.

Guests:

Jane Kirtley, professor of media ethics and law at the School of Journalism and Mass Communication at the University of Minnesota

Jeffrey McCall, professor of communication at DePauw University in Indiana and former  journalist; he is the author of “Viewer Discretion Advised: Taking Control of Mass Media Influences” (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2007); he tweets @Prof_McCall

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.