"Keep On Pushing" by Denise Sullivan

During the 1963 March on Washington, folk, blues and gospel singer Odetta unleashed her melodic and powerful voice for the cause of civil rights.  She is just one of the many artists who have used music as a force for social change.  

Billie Holiday’s 1939 recording “Strange Fruit” was a groundbreaking statement against the horrors of Jim Crow, decades before the Black Power movement began to take shape. “A change is gonna come,” sang Sam Cooke in 1963, and those words played out throughout the decade.  The musical revolution of the sixties mirrored the social revolution happening in the streets, as marchers protested the Vietnam War, women stood up for equality and the Stonewall Riots gave gays and lesbians a cause to rally around.  

In the 1970’s and 80’s, punk rock and hip-hop carried the torch for social change forward, pointing a finger at all forms of social injustice and oppression.  In her new book, Denise Sullivan shows how none of this would have been possible without the explosion of the Black Power movement, and how music helped fuel social change by bringing people together, lifting their spirits and giving them a common voice.  But for artists whose bravery inspired a generation, there was often a cost.  For many, their controversial stance meant diminished label support and a fading career.  

Sullivan interviewed dozens of artists, including Len Chandler – who, along with Joan Baez and Bob Dylan, galvanized the crowd at the 1963 March on Washington – Buffy Sainte-Marie, Solomon Burke, Yoko Ono, Janis Ian and Richie Havens.  And she asks the question, where have the voices of protest gone in today’s music?  What forces – social, political and corporate – have conspired to silence the sounds of freedom, justice and equality?

Denise Sullivan, author of Keep on Pushing: Black Power Music from Blues to Hip-Hop (Lawrence Hill Books), freelance writer and online columnist for Crawdaddy! Her previous books include Rip It Up! Rock ‘n Roll Rulebreakers and The White Stripes: Sweethearts of the Blues

TSA agents stand near an Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) full-body scanner at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). Credit: David McNew/Getty Images

The TSA effectively has carte blanche to be all up in your junk, or to at least look at pictures of it, before you get on an airplane. But the federal agency announced on Friday that it will stop using the kind of x-ray body scanners that produced the anatomically revealing images of passengers at security checkpoints in airports.

The reason? The company that makes the scanners couldn’t find a software fix to bring the scanners in line with a congressional mandate to make the scanners less revealing of passengers’ body parts. The TSA says another kind of scanner, one that is less revealing in the images it captures, will remain in use.

Does this change the actual level of security at US airports? Why did the scanners need to capture such revealing images in the first place, if there are other scanners that manage to do the same job in a more modest manner? Are x-rays of the American public’s collective crotch really an effective deterrent to would-be terrorists?

Michael Grabell, ProPublica reporter who covers travel and airport security.

Brian Michael Jenkins, Senior Advisor to the President of the Rand Corporation and one of the nation's leading experts on terrorism and homeland security.

Patrick Smith, pilot, author of the book of Ask The Pilot (Riverhead Trade Paperback Original) and founder and editor of AskThePilot.com, a blog about air travel

CVS Pharmacist Jill Kolin administers a flu shot to KPCC's morning anchor Steve Julian. Why so serious? Credit: Andrea Wang/KPCC

The worst flu in four years has hit California. The state Department of Public Health says five people under the age of 65 have been killed by influenza-related illnesses. A 22-year-old man and a 4-year-old girl who died earlier this month in Riverside county both tested positive for the virus - though the exact cause is not yet confirmed.

Officials say the flu is spreading rapidly, with the outbreak expected to peak in California next month. Federal officials say 48 states are reporting widespread flu activity. The severity of this year’s flu has prompted vaccine makers to create new and stronger immunizations that would protect against different strains of influenza. Current vaccines only protect from three kinds of flu, which this year is reportedly only 62 percent effective.

Should you get a flu shot? How many times a day should you wash your hands to stay reasonably safe? Is it silly or effective to wear surgical masks in public places? How can people die from a disease as common as the flu in 2013? And how do researchers create new vaccines to protect us from next year’s flu bug?

Dr. Jonathan Fielding, Director, Los Angeles County Department of Public Health

Shannon Pettypiece, Bloomberg News Healthcare Correspondent

U.S. President Barack Obama (L) is sworn in during the public ceremony by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts as First lady Michelle Obama, and daughters, Sasha Obama and Malia Obama look on during the presidential inauguration on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol January 21, 2013 in Washington, DC. Barack Obama was re-elected for a second term as President of the United States. Credit: Alex Wong/Getty Images

Today marks President Barack Obama’s second inaugural address. While the first time was certainly a historic moment, not just for the man but for the whole country, this one marks a momentous occasion as well. Obama just fought his way through a nasty election cycle to secure his second term, and the country has a very important four years ahead of it.

This will be complicated by the fact that Americans, both citizens and politicians in Washington, are more hyper-partisan than ever. Obama steered the country away from going over the fiscal cliff, but only after countless rounds of bargaining, most of which completely stalled. Next month, another debate will culminate over the debt ceiling. Congress’s approval rating is at its lowest point ever. The media has become a 24/7 feeding frenzy. There’s talk of potential Supreme Court nominees. And the issues keep piling up—immigration reform, gun control, the rollout of Obama’s Affordable Healthcare Act—all of which will require Obama’s complete strength and effort to see through.

So how did this speech serve as an indicator of the man’s second term? Was it reassuring in any way? And how does it compare to his last inaugural address? How about the addresses of other presidents in the past?

Guest:

Aaron Blake, political reporter for The Washington Post

David Birdsell, Dean of the Baruch College School of Public Affairs

U.S. Rep. James Moran (D-VA) (L) and Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) listen during a news conference January 16, 2013 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. House Democrats held a news conference to announce new legislation to eliminate the federal debt ceiling. Credit: Alex Wong/Getty Images

Congress will vote Wednesday on a bill to extend the limit for the U.S. debt ceiling that will allow the deadline to be postponed until May 18. The legislation contains no spending cuts, a sharp turnaround from previous Republican demands that dollar-for-dollar cuts be applied to any raise in the debt ceiling.

GOP support for the bill may come as a welcome surprise after months of debt ceiling disagreement – but some critical Democrats see Republican backing as a “gimmick,” or an overture. The proposed bill contains no actual amounts, but rather suspends the debt ceiling limitations until May 18. Pushing back the deadline again gives party leaders more time to negotiate – some say that it will give Republicans leverage against President Obama in the spending cut battles that will occur between now and the new debt ceiling deadline.

What do you think of the debt ceiling? Is pushing the deadline back to May a good short-term solution, or is it part of a political game? Will it be an effective stop-gap measure? How should Democrats and Republicans compromise on this issue? Should increases to the debt ceiling go hand-in-hand with spending cuts?

David Mark, Editor-in-Chief, Politix

Lisa Mascaro, Congressional Reporter, Los Angeles Times

A screenshot of 'SeekingArrangement.com' taken on January 21, 2013. Credit: SeekingArrangement.com

With the constant fear of rising tuition costs, some college students are seeking alternate methods to pay for their tuition and living expenses. SeekingArrangement.com, a website that allows wealthy men to sign up as “sugar daddies” to young women known as “sugar babies,” reports eight California universities with a growing number of sugar babies.

University of California Los Angeles, with an estimated annual cost of over $31,000, is ranked number 20 nationally as one of the fastest growing sugar baby campuses. The majority of sugar daddies are wealthy, older men seeking companionship, sex, and someone to pamper. In exchange, sugar daddies supply an average of $3,000 monthly to a sugar baby. This controversial arrangement has raised questions about whether this is prostitution and ethical concerns because 40 percent of the sugar daddies are married. Also, the safety of these arrangements as well as the psychological health of these sugar babies have drawn attention because some young women have told media that being a sugar baby has changed their view of dating and sex.

Are you adugar daddy or sugar baby? Is this arrangement prostitution? Is it mutually beneficial? Are there consequences to being a sugar baby?

Brandon Wade, founder and CEO of world’s largest Sugar Daddy dating website SeekingArrangement.com as well dating websites SeekingMillionaire.com, WhatsYourPrice.com, and MissTravel.com

Kathleen Barry, author of “Female Sexual Slavery” (NYU Press), “Prostitution of Sexuality”(NYU Press), and “Unmaking War, Remaking Men: How Empathy can Reshape Our Politics, Our Solder and Ourselves” (Phoenix Rising Press); Sociology Professor Emerita, Penn State University

A rollercoaster that once sat on the Funtown Pier in Seaside Heights, N.J., rests in the ocean on Wednesday, Oct. 31, 2012. The pier was washed away by superstorm Sandy. Credit: Julio Cortez/AP

After a much-maligned delay, Congress has approved nearly $60 billion in Hurricane Sandy relief funds. The first installment, a $9.7 billion flood relief bill, has already passed through the House and Senate and was signed by President Obama.

Disaster relief has caused partisan divide, but has perhaps more noticeably resulted in disagreement between members of the Republican party. Members of the House hailing from the northeast and other disaster prone or left-leaning states have called for more support from the GOP. All of the no votes on relief bills pass thus far have come from Republicans, with GOP representatives from 22 states unanimously voting no on relief efforts.

The in-party rift began with a decision from House Republicans not to vote on a Sandy relief bill before the New Year or alongside the fiscal cliff deal, and continued as a Republican minority fought for smaller relief packages and equivalent spending cuts. A bipartisan majority passed two bills that will aid in relief efforts in the northeastern states most affected by the storm, but will not cover some of the estimated $82 billion in damages.

Should the federal government be responsible for disaster relief? Should states more prone to natural disaster pay more in taxes? What is the best way to implement relief – should it go hand in hand with spending cuts? If a Sandy-level event were to take place in California, how would you want it to be handled?

Barney Keller, Communications Director of the Club for Growth, which works to promote public policies that encourage a high growth economy

Michele Dauber, Professor of Law and Sociology at Stanford Law School, author of “The Sympathetic State: Disaster Relief and the Origins of the American Welfare State” (University of Chicago Press, 2012)

Algerian Prime Minister Abdelmalek Sellal speaks during a press conference in Algiers on January 21, 2012, where he warned other nations to prepare for a higher body count after a four-day siege of a gas plant by Islamist militants ended in a bloodbath, amid fears as many as 50 hostages may have died. Credit: -/AFP/Getty Images

Details have emerged in fits and starts from the messy siege in Algeria that ended Saturday. Yesterday, the death toll grew to include 37 foreign hostages -- including three Americans--, 29 militants and one Algerian security guard, according to the Algerian government. The siege began last Wednesday when dozens of militants took control of the Ain Amenas natural gas plant. More than 700 workers were trapped hostages at the facility.

The Al Qaeda linked militants reportedly were demanding the release of two terror convicts jailed in the United States - Omar Abdel Rahman, convicted of plotting to blow up New York City landmarks and considered the spiritual leader of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and Aafia Siddiqui, a Pakistani scientist convicted of shooting at two U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan. "The United States does not negotiate with terrorists," State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said last week. Algeria -- a country that has a long history of insurgent violence -- has the same policy.

Could there have been another way to deal with the militants? Would any other offer have saved the workers who died? Or does a blanket policy against hostage negotiations help prevent more violence?

Martha Crenshaw, Senior Fellow, Center for International Security and Cooperation, Stanford University

Mark R. Jacobson, Senior Transatlantic Fellow at the German Marshall Fund. He focuses on defense and security policy, specifically emerging threats and challenges.

NASA's Mars Rover Opportunity’s Investigations at Endeavour Crater. Image shown during news conference by NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory and Steve Squyres of Cornell University at the American Geophysical Union (AGU) fall meeting in San Francisco on Dec. 4, 2012.
Credit: NASA/JPL

If you’ve never heard of the MacLaughlin crater, don’t worry. It’s hard to see something that’s only visible at night and is millions of miles away on a neighboring planet. But the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter is not limited by the same challenges as those of us stuck on Earth.

This satellite’s imaging system breaks up light into different colors as a means of determining what materials are present in an image. When taking photographs of the crater, the images depict clay and carbonates, indicators that point to the existence of water.

While these discoveries are nothing new, the dimensions of the crater (it is about 60 miles wide and 1.4 miles deep) mean that the crater could have retained water. So the crater might not be a crater after all, it might have been a lake. Discoveries such as this would not be possible without the Jet Propulsion Laboratory’s decades-long fascination with the Red Planet.

On Wednesday, JPL will release a new documentary titled “The Changing Face of Mars.” Today on AirTalk, we invite the creator of the movie, Blaine Baggett to discuss JPL’s exploration of Mars over the years, as well as any exciting new developments being found.

What is it that’s so fascinating about this planet? Is it the mystery of life? How far have we come in understanding Mars over the past decades?  

Guest:

Blaine Baggett, Director of  the JPL Office of Communications and Education; Writer, Producer and Director of “The Changing Face of Mars”

"The Changing Face of Mars" premieres on January 23rd at 8 p.m. in Caltech's Beckman Auditorium. Click here for more infomation.

Cardinal Roger Mahony former archbishop of Los Angeles (C) attends the concistory held by Pope Benedict XV at the Saint Peter's Basilica on February 18, 2012 in Vatican City, Vatican. Credit: Franco Origlia/Getty Images

Archbishop Emeritus of Los Angeles Roger M. Mahoney has again apologized for his involvement over twenty years ago in concealing child molestation by priests from law enforcement, including keeping clergy out of California to avoid prosecution. Mahoney’s apology came as his previously confidential correspondence from 1986 and 1987 recently became public evidence in a civil court case.

Mahoney has been questioned under oath in previous depositions numerous times about his handling of molestation cases, but the newly released memos written by Mahoney and other church administrators provide the strongest indication of a concerted effort by leaders in the nation's largest Catholic diocese to protect abusers from police. Last week, Anthony De Marco, the attorney representing a plaintiff in the lawsuit filed against the archdiocese asked a judge to order Mahoney and others to submit to new depositions “regarding their actions, knowledge and intent as referenced in these files.” In an apologetic statement, Mahoney confessed that memos written in those years "sometimes focused more on the needs of the perpetrator than on the serious harm that had been done to the victims."

Why did it take years for these memos to be released and made public? Is the archdiocese still trying to hide evidence that may incriminate current and former clergy? How responsible is Mahoney for the sexual abuse of children? How can victims of this abuse best recover and move on with their lives?

Harriet Ryan, reporter with the Los Angeles Times who co-wrote the Times cover story

Barbara Dorris, outreach director of SNAP (Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests)

Should Glendale ban gun shows? Credit: TIMOTHY A. CLARY/AFP/Getty Images

It could be the end for gun shows in Glendale. Tonight, the Glendale City Council will host a discussion regarding the fate of the Glendale Gun Show, which typically comes to town multiple times a year. In the wake of the Newtown tragedy, City Councilman Rafi Manoukian suggested the ban as a means to curb gun violence in the community.

Last week, gun rights supporters appeared in front of the Council in an effort to take the ban off of this week’s agenda. But Manoukian was undeterred, and now with support of Mayor Frank Quintero, he only needs one more member vote to ratify the ban. Gun advocates point out that the gun show is more of an event for families; Manoukian counters that argument with the fact that it occurs so close to Glendale Community College, which is right across the street from the Civic Auditorium where the gun show is held. Manoukian has tried to make this move before, in 2006, and there is some ambiguity to the legality of such a ban being rolled out. Glendale benefits economically from the shows, which net around $55,000 annually for the city. Fourteen years ago, Los Angeles County Supervisors voted to ban gun shows on county property, which resulted in the loss of the hugely popular Pomona Gun Show.

Should municipalities profit at all from gun sales? Are there safety issues surrounding such a gathering of gun owners and sellers?  Do you enjoy gun shows as a sport-oriented, collector and family-friendly event? What alternatives would you seek out if it were to be banned?

Guest:
Paul Neuharth, Attorney based in San Diego who works on gun ownership cases (reinstating gun licenses)

Dr Philip Nitschke holds up a drug testing kit which is used as part of assisted suicides following a workshop on the subject on May 5, 2009 in Bournemouth, England. Credit: Matt Cardy/Getty Images

Last week, George Taylor was given a two-day jail sentence and three years probation for killing his wife, Gewynn. The couple, both in their 80’s and with unspecified medical problems, had wanted to die together. After suffocating his wife with a plastic bag, Taylor attempted to do the same to himself, but failed.  He pleaded guilty to the felony of assisted suicide.  The outcome was the result of leniency on the part of both the prosecutor and the judge – and it’s not an isolated case.

There have been several recent instances of elderly people who made their wish to die known, and were aided in carrying out that wish by spouses, friends, or family members.  Although doctor-assisted suicide is allowed in three states, California is not one of them; ending a life is clearly against the law. Yet assisted-suicide cases rarely come to trial.  Prosecutors, feeling that jurors will be sympathetic to, say, a grieving, elderly person who has helped an ailing spouse to end his or her suffering, prefer to bring lesser charges.

Is this a case of humanity overstepping the law?  Should “helping” someone to die bring a lighter sentence than other types of killing? Should our laws be changed to allow for helping a loved one who is determined to end his life?

Robert Weisberg, Professor of Law and Director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center at Stanford Law

"My Share of the Task: A Memoir by General Stanley A. McChrystal"

Although General Stanley A. McChrystal may want to be known for enacting a counterinsurgency doctrine that changed the war in Afghanistan, the public may remember him more for his success in being part of the task force that captured Saddam Hussein and the accusations of insubordination that forced his resignation.

In his new book, McChrystal tells his side of the story. “My Share of the Task: A Memoir by General Stanley A. McChrystal” is not McChrystal’s outlet for criticizing government and the military, nor does it attempt to vindicate his highly publicized statements in "Rolling Stone." Rather, he simply tells his story and attempts to personalize the soldiers fighting in the war.

McChrystal details how he grew up in a military family and then spent six years as Commander of a special operations task force in Iraq. He remembers some of the thousands of raids, explaining how creating a network between different departments led to greater intelligence that quickened their operating speed. In 2009, McChrystal became the Commander of the NATO coalition in Afghanistan and took on the task of changing public distrust toward the government and the war. In addition, he had to convince the leaders of 37 countries, as well as over 100,000 troops, that the war could be won by counterinsurgency methods of effective communication rather than brute force.

What he learned, after years of forceful dealings with Iraqi and Afghan civilians, was that the most important task he faced was winning the trust of the Afghan people.  The effectiveness of McChrystal’s counterinsurgency strategies, focusing on communication rather than confrontation, are still being questioned.

Do you think his strategy in Afghanistan is effective? Is there an inherent culture gap between civilians and the military?  How did McChrystal gain the trust of a people he had been sent to overpower?

Guest:
General Stanley A. McChrystal, U.S. Army, retired, author of "My Share of the Task: A Memoir" (Portfolio/Penguin)

Proposed Goodell Monorail, 1963 (Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Research Library and Archive)

Can you imagine Los Angeles with a series of interconnected public parks? With major freeways cutting through canyons and hills? In an upcoming exhibit at Los Angeles’ A+D Architecture and Design Museum, co-curators Sam Lubell and Greg Goldin explore a version of L.A. that was imagined, but never built.

“Never Built: Los Angeles” will showcase skyscrapers and hilltop museums from famed architects that didn’t make it into the city’s skyline and will explore how the envisioned works might have changed L.A. – for good or bad. What do you think of Los Angeles architecture?

Would the city be better with more skyscrapers or more interconnected roads and public transportation? Could any of the imagined architecture be ruinous to Los Angeles lifestyle or culture? What would you change or keep the same? A+D curators Lubell and Goldin join Larry to discuss their upcoming exhibit and the architecture that could have transformed Los Angeles.

Sam Lubell, co-curator of “Never Built: Los Angeles” at the A+D Architecture and Design Museum and co-author of the forthcoming book by the same name

Greg Goldin, co-curator of “Never Built: Los Angeles” at the A+D Architecture and Design Museum and co-author of the forthcoming book by the same name

WASHINGTON, DC - NOVEMBER 08: Latinos and immigrants participate in a rally on immigration reform in front of the White House on November 8, 2012 in Washington, DC. Immigrant rights organizations called on President Barack Obama to fulfill his promise of passing comprehensive immigration reform. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images) Credit: Mark Wilson/Getty Images

The reelection of recently inaugurated President Obama is a telltale sign of a greater shift in perspective among Americans on many issues including immigration policy. A newly released poll conducted by Associated Press-GfK indicates that 6 in 10 Americans now support allowing illegal immigrants to eventually become United States citizens, a significant increase driven by a turn in many Republicans’ positions since the 2012 elections. A majority in the GOP - 53 percent - now favor blazing a more inclusive trail toward citizenship. That’s a 22 percent increase from 2010.

The Republicans’ shift in their approach to immigration policy comes as the GOP seeks to increase its lackluster support among Latino voters, who rallied behind President Obama in November. In his inaugural speech on Monday, Obama declared, “Our journey is not complete until we find a better way to welcome the striving, hopeful immigrants who still see America as a land of opportunity; until bright young students and engineers are enlisted in our workforce rather than expelled from our country." Moreover, David Axelrod, one of Obama’s top advisors, stated on Monday that immigration reform will be a high priority for the Obama administration that will be prompted early on during the president’s second term.

Why has such a significant shift in immigration ideology among Republicans happened so fast? Is the GOP simply pandering to Latino voters for their support or has a more comprehensive understanding of immigration needs been adopted? What kinds of real and enduring changes in immigration policy might we see over the next four years?

Mark Lopez, Associate Director of the Pew Hispanic Center, Washington D.C.

Dan Judy, Vice President of North Star Opinion Research, a Republican pollster

The Dodgers celebrate a victory in Dodger Stadium. Soon, their games will be aired on their own channel. Credit: Harry How/Getty Images

Reportedly, the Dodgers have agreed to a deal with Time Warner Cable for the team’s television contract. As a result, the Dodgers will now get its own channel, akin to the setup the Lakers have after their deal with Time Warner Cable last year. The specifics of the deal aren’t yet known—it has yet to be sent to the MLB for approval—but it is expected to land somewhere between $6 and $7 billion.

Previously, the Dodgers had a deal with Fox Sports, but Time Warner Cable came into the conversation when an exclusive negotiating window with Fox expired. Time Warner Cable now has television deals with the Lakers and the Dodgers, both of which were previously with Fox Sports.

So what does this mean for Los Angeles Dodgers fans? How has the Lakers deal with Time Warner Cable played out? Can we expect to see more of the same in this deal? What does it mean for the team, and for local television?  

Guests:

Bill Shaikin, Covering baseball on and off the field for the Los Angeles Times

Jon Weisman, Reporter and Editor at Variety

Does public nudity compromise public safety? Credit: Flickr via Humanoide

A federal judge is weighing the constitutionality of a ban on public nudity in San Francisco. The ban is scheduled to take effect next week. The new prohibition was passed by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors last November. The ordinance states, "public exposure of ...private parts invades the privacy of members of the public who are unwillingly or unexpectedly exposed to such conduct."

Nudist activists argue the ban stifles free expression. They are suing city and county officials in a First Amendment challenge. In court hearings last week, the plaintiffs' attorney said public nudity is free expression akin to court-protected flag-burning. Judge Edward Chen said the analogy wasn't so clear cut. But he also questioned why the county ordinance did not include an exemption for nude acts of political expression, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. The judge is expected to rule before the ban takes effect on February 1.

How did public nudity become a thing in San Francisco? Why is it so important to these activists? Do you view it as a First Amendment right? Does someone else's nudity interfere with your privacy or safety - as the ordinance states?

Christina DiEdoardo, Attorney, Law offices of Christina DiEdoardo; representing nudist activists in U.S. District Court

Junior Seau's family sues the NFL for Seau's death. Credit: Elsa/Getty Images

The family of deceased NFL linebacker Junior Seau sued the NFL today for “acts or omissions” about the danger of repetitive blows to the head that led to Seau’s chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) and ultimately his suicide.

Seau’s family is accusing the NFL of deliberately concealing the consequences of traumatic brain injuries, and this isn’t the first accusation made to the NFL. In fact, the Associated Press reported over 3,800 players have sued the NFL over head injuries. The Seaus are also suing the helmet manufacturer Riddell and calling the company “negligent.”

Does the NFL promote violence in the game? Do football players know the risks involved when they sign up to play? Can these lawsuits change the way American football is played?

Jody Armour, Roy P. Crocker Professor of Law at USC Gould School of Law

David Orentlicher, Samuel R. Rosen Professor of Law; Co-director of the William S. and Christine S. Hall Center for Law and Health; Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law

Lawry's Prime Rib restaurant in 1938. Lawry's original location was on La Cienega Boulevard where the current Lawry's sits. Credit: Lawry's the Prime Rib

While trendsetters and foodies might relish seeking out the latest celebrity chef-owned eatery or unearthing the next best-kept-dining-secret, for some meals, only a classic restaurant will do – one whose food, décor and beehive-crowned waitresses have stood the test of time.  These are the fine dining establishments that never let us down, nor does their signature dish: Oysters Rockefeller at Antoine’s, prime rib at Lawry’s,  Zombies at Don the Beachcomber.

There are a few key elements to mid-century classic dining: the white tablecloths, the dark, buttery leather booths, the film noir lighting. The wacky theme décor – north woods cabin, Polynesian Tiki hut, French Quarter bordello. The banquet rooms, where generations of families might have celebrated birthdays, graduations and weddings – and perhaps still do.  And of course, the food: steaks, shrimp, baked potatoes, wedges of lettuce, jumbo-sized cocktails, flaming desserts.

Peter Moruzzi’s new book celebrates iconic mid-century restaurants from Miami to San Francisco, Chicago to New Orleans, with intoxicating photographs and mouth-watering menu descriptions.  Although many of them are long gone, this world is far from extinct – here in Southern California you can still dine out ‘Mad Men’ style at old-world joints like Musso & Frank’s, The Smoke House and Pacific Dining Car, or impress a first date by singing along with Marty and Elayne at The Dresden Room.

What’s your favorite classic watering hole?  Which bygone restaurants do you miss the most?  Tell us below.

Peter Moruzzi, author of "Classic Dining: Discovering America’s Finest Mid-Century Restaurants" (Gibbs Smith), author of pictorial histories including "Havana Before Castro: When Cuba Was a Tropical Playground" (Gibbs Smith)

Samsung's Smart Care washer and dryer are on display at the 2013 International CES at the Las Vegas Convention Center on January 8, 2013 in Las Vegas, Nevada. Credit: David Becker/Getty Images

As the digital age continues to expand, consumers get the pleasure of seeing older appliances mix with emerging technology. Sometimes this is a blessing, as nowadays some refrigerators, washers and dryers have been designed in such a way that they use less energy more efficiently than ever before. That’s a good thing.

But sometimes manufacturers take a Frankenstein’s monster approach to integrating the modern technology with older appliances. For instance, a $4,000 refrigerator from Samsung at the recent Consumer Electronics Show has a touch screen and WiFi. One of the features is so you can use the screen to come up with a grocery list. But couldn’t you just use your phone, and then take it to the store? And what about the WiFi? Do you really need to download the new Justin Bieber album on your fridge? If so, maybe don’t invite anyone over when you’re making lunch.

Also, there are now washers and dryers that allow you to start a laundry cycle from your phone. That’s handy, sure, but how are you going to load the laundry into the machine and pour in soap if you’re not at home? While these appliances may be duds, there has to be a way to use today’s technology to make appliances better, right?

Slate’s Farhad Manjoo has some ideas of his own for improvements. Have you purchased any of these disappointing appliances and been let down by the technology? Have you seen them in use? What do you wish your appliances could do? Think outside the ice box.

Guest:
Farhad Manjoo, tech writer for Slate