The Brief

About a month after the Eaton Fire destroyed thousands of houses in Altadena, fleets of smoke remediation vans could be seen parked outside the homes still standing.

Ash from the fire is potentially hazardous to human health, according to the public health officials. Work to safely remove that debris is now in full swing inside many homes.

But there’s no van outside the Pasadena home of a tenant we’re calling Elizabeth. Her single-family rental house is about three blocks south of houses that were incinerated. When she asked about her landlord’s plans to do something about the smoke damage, the landlord ordered her, her husband and her two young children to move out.

“After all the things that we've all been through, to now hear that your landlord is not only not going to clean the house, but wants you out because you’ve asked him to take care of the cleaning of the house ... it's so upsetting,” Elizabeth said.

LAist is not using her full name because of her concerns about further straining her relationship with her landlord and jeopardizing any future housing search. We have reviewed her landlord’s correspondence with her to verify what she’s been told.

Elizabeth is among several tenants near the Eaton Fire burn area who told LAist they’re not getting clear answers from landlords or property managers about who will take responsibility for cleaning homes coated in ash. In some cases, landlords have outright refused to fix smoke damage, telling renters they can either pay for it themselves or move out.

Housing experts say that under state and local laws, landlords are required to address smoke damage. But in practice, some renters are being told by government officials that their only path for getting this work done is to take their landlord to court.

‘No plans to clean this house’

Elizabeth’s family is renting a Craftsman home. The architecture is charming, but like many houses in Pasadena, it shows its age. The old latch windows don’t fully close. Hurricane-force winds were able to spew ash through the cracks, leaving visible residue in many areas.

The worst ash buildup is in her 10-year-old daughter’s bedroom, where the windows blew open, Elizabeth said. A dark layer of soot covered the child’s desk and toys.

Elizabeth said finding another nearby home to rent isn’t a viable option because the market has been flooded with fire victims. There are few available homes, and costs have skyrocketed as landlords increase asking rents — in many cases, higher than what is legally allowed.

“We're still paying rent here, and yet living at a friend's house for free for a couple more weeks,” Elizabeth said. “Then we really don't have anywhere to go because there's been no plans to clean this house.

“Unless we pay out of pocket and clean this place up, it's not going to happen.”

Smoke remediation vans have become a common sight in Pasadena, but some renters say they're struggling to get answers and timelines.

(

David Wagner

/

LAist

)

Who’s responsible for Eaton Fire ash?

Housing rights attorneys and landlord advocates agree that, under state law governing rental housing habitability, removing potentially toxic debris after a fire should be a landlord’s responsibility. They told LAist that renters are on the hook for any damage to their personal belongings, such as couches or mattresses saturated with ash. But it’s the landlord’s job to make the rental housing unit habitable, experts said.

Amy Tannenbaum, an attorney with Public Counsel, said government officials “should be making clear that this is the landlord's responsibility — bottom line.”

Housing experts said many landlords are fulfilling their duty to clean up rental homes. But some may be unsure where to start.

“The first call an owner should be making is to their insurance company,” said Daniel Yukelson, executive director of the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles. “They need to get a proper abatement company out to the property to assess it and do whatever cleanup is necessary before the tenants move back in, so that tenants have a safe environment to go back to.”

Renters feel out of the loop 

But some landlords and property managers are declining to tell tenants if, or when, they will arrange for smoke remediation.

Jason, a tenant who also asked LAist not to use his full name because of concerns about retaliation from his landlord, said a representative from his renters insurance company confirmed that his policy would not cover smoke remediation for his two-bedroom apartment in Pasadena.

“They would cover my personal property, but not the premises,” Jason said. “I was like, ‘Well, who would do that?’ And he was like, ‘Well, your landlord should.’”

“Yeah, they should,” Jason continued. “But they are, I think, trying to avoid that.”

Jason said he and his daughters have been bouncing between Airbnb rentals and hotel rooms, waiting for updates from his property manager. He said the apartment building has been inspected by a remediation company, but he hasn’t heard anything about the results.

“I don't want to live in a place that could be dangerous with two young kids,” he said. “It just doesn't feel like a very honest, transparent relationship, which is unfortunate when people's safety is at risk.”

Personal belongings are piled on a sidewalk outside an apartment building near the Eaton Fire burn area.

(

David Wagner

/

LAist

)

Pasadena says ash is toxic, but doesn’t violate code

Pasadena health officials have been telling tenants that ash from the Eaton Fire is potentially toxic. But the city’s housing officials have been telling tenants they cannot force landlords to carry out ash cleanup.

Pasadena housing officials have told tenants to consider hiring an attorney and that local regulations don’t specifically address toxic ash in rental housing. The city’s code compliance employees have emailed tenants, saying, “there are no codes in regards to ash so this would be considered a civil matter.”

Pasadena’s building code says housing units are not considered habitable if they contain “debris, garbage, offal, rat harborages, stagnant water, combustible materials” or other materials that could “constitute fire, health or safety hazards.”

The word “ash” is not explicitly mentioned in Pasadena’s code. By contrast, the city of L.A.’s building code specifically lists “ash” and “partially burned building materials” as hazardous.

Tannenbaum, the Public Counsel attorney, said that discrepancy doesn’t mean ash is beyond the scope of Pasadena’s code. She said local laws include broad language about health and safety that clearly cover ash containing chemicals from thousands of destroyed homes.

“If you're saying that this ash probably contains toxic substances — including asbestos, including lead — this is injurious to human health, but it's OK for a tenant to move back in there. That's a pretty callous disregard for a tenant's health and safety,” Tannenbaum said.

LAist emailed Pasadena code compliance officials to ask how they interpret laws governing habitability of rental housing with smoke damage. We asked if they would give a home coated in Eaton Fire ash a passing grade upon inspection. They have not responded to those questions.

The city’s spokesperson, Lisa Derderian, emailed a statement saying issues that affect a renter’s well-being “may give rise to a civil action between landlord and tenant.”

The statement goes on to say, “The [Rent Stabilization] Department is also in the process of offering mediation services to facilitate resolution of complex landlord-tenants concerns, which will be available to fire victims.”

Ash from the Eaton Fire is visible on a windowsill that held potted plants. Health officials have said ash from the recent wildfires is toxic.

(

David Wagner

/

LAist

)

Renters unsure when they can return

Ryan Bell, the chair of the Pasadena Rental Housing Board, said he has heard from dozens of tenants who feel they've been left to fend for themselves.

“I think tenants are rightfully concerned,” Bell said. “Most tenants that I've talked to are simply saying to the landlord, ‘Can you please just give us a timeline? We just need to know: Do we need to stay with our folks for a month? Is it two weeks? Is it three months?’”

Renters insurance plans typically cover temporary relocation costs. But different policies have different coverage limits. And some tenants worry they’ll have to pay out of pocket if remediation work isn’t scheduled soon.

Marah Eakin and Andrew Morgan rent a home in Northwest Pasadena about one block from homes that burned down in Altadena. Since Jan. 7, they’ve been living in hotels and short-term rentals with their 6-year-old twins.

Morgan said their current Airbnb rental in South Pasadena costs about $2,000 per week.

“It costs more than our rent,” he said. “It's much smaller than our house. We don't have most of our stuff. We're just thrown way off balance. ... Like most families, we really thrive on a routine and a schedule. And it's just kind of out the window.”

The struggle to get clear answers 

Eakin and Morgan said their property management company — Cornerstone R/E Management, Inc. — went weeks without confirming whether their landlord would cover smoke remediation or when that work would happen.

Last month, a Cornerstone representative told the couple, “We are working on the basis that until told otherwise, properties are assumed livable,” according to emails sent to the tenants and reviewed by LAist. The representative said, unless anything changed, February rent would still be due.

“It feels like there's no good answer,” Eakin said. “Do we get a rental for a month? Do we get a rental for three months? Should we just cut bait and move out? There's nowhere to move, really, within driving distance of school. So I don't really know what to do.”

About an hour and a half after LAist emailed Cornerstone seeking comment about Eakin and Morgan’s situation, an employee contacted the couple to say a smoke and ash adjuster had been assigned to their case and they could soon receive a refund on their rent since the fire.

Trevor Barrocas, Cornerstone’s operating officer, emailed LAist with a statement: “We are working together with our clients and their insurance companies with the clear objective of: professionally assessing all damage, completing all necessary repairs and remediation; and, subsequently, returning displaced tenants to their homes as soon as possible.”

It's not your mother's podcast — or your father's, or anyone else's. The Washington Post's new offering, "Your Personal Podcast," uses artificial intelligence to customize podcasts for its users, blending the algorithm you might find in a news feed with the convenience of portable audio.

The podcast is "personalized automatically based on your reading history" of Post articles, the newspaper says on its help page. Listeners also have some control: At the click of a button, they can alter their podcast's topic mix — or even swap its computer-generated "hosts."

The AI podcast immediately made headlines — and drew criticisms from people questioning its accuracy, and the motives behind it.

Nicholas Quah, a critic and staff writer for Vulture and New York magazine who writes a newsletter about podcasts, says the AI podcast is an example of the Post's wide-ranging digital experiments — but one that didn't go quite right.

"This is one of many technologically, digitally oriented experiments that they're doing" that is aimed at "getting more audience, breaking into new demographics," he says. Those broader efforts range from a generative AI tool for readers to a digital publishing platform. But in this case, Quah adds, "It feels like it's compromising the core idea of what the news product is."

On that help page, the newspaper stresses that the podcast is in its early beta phase and "is not a traditional editorial podcast."

Bailey Kattleman, head of product and design at the Post, calls it "an AI-powered audio briefing experience" — and one that will soon let listeners talk back to it.

"In an upcoming release, they'll be able to actually interact and ask follow up questions to dig in deeper to what they've just heard," Kattleman says in an interview with NPR.

As technically sophisticated as that sounds, there are many questions about the new podcast's accuracy — even its ability to correctly pronounce the names of Post journalists it cites. Semafor reported that errors, cited by staffers at the Post, included "misattributing or inventing quotes and inserting commentary, such as interpreting a source's quotes" as the paper's own stance.

In the newspaper's app, a note advises listeners to "verify information" by checking the podcast against its source material.

In a statement, the Washington Post Guild — which represents newsroom employees and other staff — tells NPR, "We are concerned about this new product and its rollout," alleging that it undermines the Post's mission and its journalists' work.

Citing the paper's standing practice of issuing a correction if a story contains an error, the guild added, "why would we support any technology that is held to a different, lower standard?"

So, why is the Post rolling out an AI podcast? And will other news and audio outlets follow its lead?

Here are some questions, and answers:

Isn't AI podcasting already a thing?

"The Post has certainly gone out on a ledge here among U.S. legacy publishers," Andrew Deck tells NPR. But he adds that the newspaper isn't the first to experiment with AI-generated podcasts in the wider news industry.

Deck, who writes about journalism and AI for Harvard University's Nieman Lab, points to examples such as the BBC's My Club Daily, an AI-generated soccer podcast that lets users hear content related to their favorite club. In 2023, he adds, "a Swiss public broadcaster used voice clones of real radio hosts on the air."

News outlets have also long offered an automated feature that converts text articles into computer-generated voices.

Even outside of the news industry, AI tools for creating podcasts and other audio are more accessible than ever. Some promise to streamline the editing process, while others can synthesize documents or websites into what sounds like a podcast conversation.

Why do publishers want to experiment with AI podcasts?

"It's cost-effective," says Gabriel Soto, senior director of research at Edison Research, which tracks the podcast industry. "You cut out many of the resources and people needed to produce a podcast (studios, writers, editors, and the host themselves)."

And if a brand can create a successful AI virtual podcast in today's highly competitive podcasting market, Soto adds, it could become a valuable intellectual property in the future.

Deck says that if the Post's experiment works, the newspaper "may be able to significantly scale up and expand its audio journalism offerings, without investing in the labor that would normally be required to expand."

In an interview, Kattleman stresses the new product isn't meant to replace traditional podcasts: "We think they have a unique and enduring role, and that's not going away at the Post."

What's unique about the Post AI podcast?

For Deck, the level of customization it promises is an innovation. Being able to tailor a podcast specific to one person, he says, "is arguably beyond what any podcast team in journalism right now can produce manually."

In an example the Post published, listeners can choose from voice options with names like "Charlie and Lucy" and "Bert and Ernie."

Kattleman says her team was working from the idea that for an audience, there isn't a "one size fits all" when it comes to AI and journalism.

"Some people want that really straight briefing style; some people prefer something more conversational and more voicey," she says.

Quah says that adding an AI podcast is a bid to make stories accessible to a broader audience.

He says that with the podcast, the Post seems to be trying to reach young people who "don't want to read anymore, they just want to listen to the news."

A key goal, Kattleman says, is to make podcasts more flexible, to appeal to younger listeners who are on the go.

Outlining the process behind the Post's AI podcast, Kattleman says, "Everything is based on Washington Post journalism."

An LLM, or large language model, converts a story into a short audio script, she says. A second LLM then vets the script for accuracy. After the final script is stitched together, Kattleman adds, the voice narrates the episode.

Will listeners embrace an AI news podcast?

Soto, of Edison Research, says that 1 in 5 podcast consumers say they've listened to an AI-narrated podcast.

But, he adds that for podcast listeners, "many prefer the human connection, accepting AI tools to assist in creating the content, but not in executing or hosting the podcast."

The new AI podcast reminds Deck a bit of the hyper-personalized choices for users offered by TikTok and other social media.

"There is a level of familiarity
and, arguably, comfort with algorithmic curation among younger audiences," he says.

But while younger audiences tend to be tech savvy, many of them are also thoughtful about authenticity and connection.

"Community is at the core of why people listen to podcasts," Soto says.

Then there's the idea of a host or creator's personality, which drives engagement on TikTok and other platforms.

"These creators have built a relationship with their audience — and maybe even trust — even if they haven't spoken to sources themselves," Deck says. "This type of news content is a far cry from the disembodied banter of AI podcast hosts."

What are the potential downsides of AI podcasts?

One big potential consequence is the loss of jobs — and for companies, the loss of talent.

"The automation of it kind of erases the entire sort of voice performance industry," Quah says. "There are people who do this for a living," he adds, who could "produce higher quality versions of these recordings."

There are also concerns that, if AI chooses a story and controls how it's presented, it might create an echo chamber, omitting context or skepticism that a journalist would likely provide.

"AI-based news personalization tends to land firmly in the camp of delivering audiences what they want to know," Deck says.

Deck says he's willing to give the Post's AI podcast a bit of time to see how it plays out. But Deck does have a chief concern: "I can say point blank, generative AI models hallucinate."

And when AI models are wrong, he says, they're often confidently so.

Blurring boundaries between human and AI voices could also raise questions of trust — a critical factor for a news organization.

As Soto puts it, "What happens when your audience expects content from the real you and ends up finding AI instead?"

Storylines about abortion and conversations about it showed up on television 65 times this year, on prestigious dramas like The Pitt and Call the Midwife, on reality shows such as W.A.G.s to Riches and Love is Blind and on lowbrow animated comedies like Family Guy and South Park. That's about the same as last year. In 2024, TV shows featured 66 such plotlines.

But in the past few years, there's been a significant drop in the number of characters who actually went through with an abortion. 37% obtained an abortion in 2025, a 14% decline since 2023.

That's according to the annual Abortion Onscreen report. It comes from Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health, a research program on abortion and reproductive health based at the University of California San Francisco.

"I think there still is a lot of stigma, even in allegedly liberal Hollywood," says researcher Steph Herold. She says the report, which has come out for about a decade, reflects a profound lack of accurate representation of abortion use in America. For example, she points to research showing that about 60% of real life Americans who seek an abortion deal with some sort of barrier.

"But only about a third of people who are characters on screen face any kind of barrier to abortion," Herold said. "Whether it was not being able to come up with the cost of the abortion, not having somebody to watch their kids or cover for them at work, having to deal with clinics that are miles away, or in other states having insurance that wouldn't cover the cost." Most TV shows in 2025 depicting women struggling to get abortions focused on legal obstacles in the past and present.

On TV, 80% of characters seeking abortions are upper or middle class, but in real life, most abortion patients struggle to make ends meet. "This [disparity] obscures the role that poverty plays in obstructing access to abortion, and perhaps explains why we so rarely see plotlines in which characters wrestle with financial barriers to abortion access," the study says.

This year, a teenager on The Pitt sought abortion pills to end her pregnancy — one of only three stories depicting medication abortion out of 65 plotlines about abortion this year. That's another disparity between representation on-screen and real-world numbers: research shows that abortion pills account for the majority of abortions in the U.S. Another difference: only 8% of people seeking abortion on TV are parents. In real life, most abortion patients have at least one child.

It is unrealistic, says Herold, to expect TV to perfectly reflect current abortion use in the U.S., but she said she was disappointed by certain trends. Fewer characters this year received emotional support around their abortions, and more shows, she said, including Chicago Med, 1923, Breathless and Secrets We Keep featured plotlines that emphasized shame and stigma around abortions, especially because of religion. These storylines, the report says, "both obscure the diversity of religious observance among people having abortions, portraying religious patients as exclusively Christian, and also only associating religion with prohibiting abortion, instead of being a meaningful or supportive part of someone's abortion decision-making and experience."

But even though abortion has long been a hot-button political issue, Herold says millions of Americans have had some sort of experience with abortions. "Whether it's having one themselves or helping a daughter or a friend," she said, adding that stories that reflect a diversity of abortion experiences will be familiar to many viewers.

One bright spot, she added, was that television is doing a better job of reflecting the racial realities of abortion. A slight majority of characters in abortion plotlines are people of color — and although they are by far the majority of abortion seekers in real life, this marks a notable improvement from a decade ago, when TV shows more often portrayed women seeking abortions as wealthy and white.

Geminids, the strongest meteor shower of the year, hit a peak this weekend, sending over 150 meteors per hour through the night sky tonight and Sunday.

Vanessa Alarcon, an astronomical observer at the Griffith Observatory, says despite being the best and brightest every year, these meteors don’t tend to get many fans.

" It's usually not as heavily attended, I think because it's a lot colder in the winter. So it's definitely a deterrent, but technically, it's more meteors per hour than the Perseids are," Alarcon said.

The Perseids are typically visible between July and August, but this summer, they were mostly drowned out because of light pollution from the full moon.

Alarcon says it will be a different story this weekend.

" The Geminids ... there's about a 25% crescent moon. So it's actually going be even better than the Perseids," Alarcon said.

Where to go for the best view

For the best viewing experience, you'll have to brave the cold of the deserts and mountains at night, but it should be worth the trip.

"You should go to a darker sky," Alarcon said. "And basically, you just want to get away from the city lights — anything away from the city lights is going to be an improvement from trying to watch it at home."

When to best see it

The Geminids are notable for being exceptionally bright, burning like fireballs for several seconds. The meteors can be seen after 8 p.m. tonight, Alarcon said, peaking between 1:20 and 2:20 a.m. and visible until 5:20 a.m.