Topline:
Whether you’re looking to connect with a reporter or have an interview coming up, here’s a cheat sheet to help you talk with journalists, including our staff from LAist.
Why it matters: Reporters come to you for a reason. They may be intimidating because they have a mic or a camera, but you have a perspective they need. Media outlets also want to expand their audiences, and that includes you.
Read on... for our cheat sheet on how to talk with journalists.
LAist reports on local issues for — and with — communities across Southern California, but chances are most readers have never spoken with a journalist before. Your stories and experiences power our reporting, so it’s important that people know what to expect when they speak with a reporter.
That’s what this guide is for.
Below are some tips from our newsroom on what to keep in mind when talking to a journalist.
Tell the story you want to tell about yourself.
Be honest. Truthfulness and facts are central to journalistic ethics.
Also know your worth. Reporters come to you for a reason. They may be intimidating because they have a mic or a camera, but you have a perspective they need. Media outlets also want to expand their audiences, and that includes you.
Contact reporters by social media or send them a personal email — at LAist, contact information is available on our staff page. If you meet a reporter, get their business card. It will usually have a direct phone number to talk with them.
Probably not. Journalists are often working with a limited word count or air time. They will likely use one short sound bite or quote from you. It’s also possible they will not use your interview at all. Reporters and their editors decide what will get published.
Probably not. It is against journalistic ethics to have sources review a story before it’s published. Imagine if a journalist were to do a piece about government corruption. You wouldn’t want the government agency to review the story and edit it. Editors review stories for accuracy.
It depends on the type of story. Some stories are short and may air on the radio or be published online the same day you talk to the reporter. Other times a reporter might work on a story for several weeks or months. It’s OK to follow up with the reporter who talked to you and ask when the story might be done and ask them to let you know where you can read or hear it.
You are welcome to ask reporters about their fact-checking process or how they make sure a story is accurate. Not all outlets have fact-checkers. If the story is an investigative story or a long-form or magazine format, designated fact-checkers are more common. At LAist, reporters and editors are responsible for verifying information.
Your story is your own and during an interview you have full control over what you say to a reporter. Answer questions in any way that makes you feel most comfortable, and you can always decline to answer a question.
You don't have to disclose your immigration status to a reporter. If it's directly relevant to the story, a trustworthy reporter will explain that and also tell you how they'd handle the information. You can decline to answer.
It's a great question and relates directly to media literacy — meaning how well you can spot misinformation, disinformation and bias. The reality is that we all have points of view. Here are some tools to check on where a publication falls across the political spectrum:
You can come to an agreement with reporters ahead of the conversation about how your words can be used:
It's worth noting that different newsrooms may use these terms slightly differently. You should confirm with the reporter that you have as shared understanding of the meaning.
No and no. You will not pay or get paid to be in a news story because this is against journalistic ethics. Anyone who receives payment for a story could be swayed to bend the truth.
If you feel that the reporter misrepresented your story, you can ask for a correction or an update to clarify a point. Reporters want to get the story right and they don't want to incorrect or misleading information to go unchecked. That said, corrections deal with information that is factually incorrect, so you should be ready to explain what was wrong and why. Under California law, you have 20 days to demand a correction and the publisher has to respond within a set period of time.
Think about the main points you want to get across in your interview. What are the most critical things for the reporter to know? Some people like to organize their thoughts into three major points. If you are not used to telling your story, you may want to have a friend ask you some questions to practice. Depending on the story, a reporter may also ask if you have any pictures to share that they can use to help tell the story.
You can reach out to LAist reporters through the contact information listed on their bios. All our editorial staff, including the teams reporting, editing and producing news, are listed here.
Aside from contacting journalists directly, you can share your story with LAist through short surveys and meeting us in person. Learn more here.
This guide was originally written by former LAist early childhood producer Stefanie Ritoper, with contributions from Mariana Dale. Cato Hernández and David Rodriguez also contributed to this guide.
Topline:
A City Council committee voted Friday to shelve a proposed ballot measure aimed at cutting L.A.'s “mansion tax” nearly in half. Ysabel Jurado, chair of the ad hoc committee on Measure ULA, said it's too early to determine the tax's long-term effects on housing and revenue.
Why it matters: The proposal by Councilmembers John Lee and Marqueece Harris-Dawson would have asked voters in November to reduce the ULA transfer tax rate for multifamily and mixed-use properties to somewhere between 2% and 3.5%, down from the current rate of up to 5.5%.
How we got here: L.A. voters approved Measure ULA in 2022 to fund affordable housing and homelessness prevention. The measure taxes real estate sales over about $5 million. Since taking effect in April 2023, ULA has raised just over $1.1 billion from 1,633 real estate transactions, according to the city’s housing department. Critics say the tax has suppressed housing development.
What's next?: In its final meeting, the committee instead advanced a narrower pilot program that would reduce the property transfer tax only for newly built affordable housing projects. The ULA committee dissolves this weekend, but the ballot measure proposal was also referred to the City Council's rules committee, which could decide to take it up in the coming months.
A City Council committee voted Friday to shelve a proposed ballot measure aimed at cutting L.A.'s “mansion tax” nearly in half.
The ad hoc committee on Measure ULA voted 2-1 to set aside a proposal by Councilmembers John Lee and Marqueece Harris-Dawson that would have asked voters in November to reduce the ULA transfer tax rate for multifamily and mixed-use properties to somewhere between 2% and 3.5%, down from the current rate of up to 5.5%.
However, the ballot measure proposal was also referred to the City Council’s rules, elections, and intergovernmental relations committee, which could still choose to move it forward.
Instead, the ad hoc committee advanced a narrower pilot program that would reduce the property transfer tax only for newly built affordable housing projects.
The pilot program won't need voter approval in the form of a ballot measure. Committee Chair Ysabel Jurado, who introduced the substitute language, said she believes the city should avoid a ULA ballot measure because it’s still too early to evaluate the measure’s long-term effects.
“ I'm against going to the ballot, but I'm for making fixes that make this better,” Jurado said.
Voters will see a separate proposal on their ballots by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association to effectively repeal Measure ULA.
If the L.A. City Council does not approve reforming the measure, the only decision on the ballot in November may be whether to keep the mansion tax in its current form or end it.
L.A. voters approved Measure ULA in 2022 to fund affordable housing and homelessness prevention. The measure taxes real estate sales over about $5 million. Since taking effect in April 2023, ULA has raised just over $1.1 billion from 1,633 real estate transactions, according to the city’s housing department.
The city projects it will generate about $500 million in the coming fiscal year — about half of what proponents initially promised. It has funded about 800 new affordable units and helped stabilize thousands of renters facing eviction, according to the housing department.
But critics say the tax has suppressed housing development. Several studies link the tax to a slowdown in apartment construction in Los Angeles, but ULA supporters say high interest rates and broader economic conditions are to blame.
The City Council's ad hoc committee on Measure ULA was formed earlier this year to study how the measure is working and develop potential reforms. That work took on more urgency inside L.A. city hall after the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association qualified a statewide ballot measure for November that would effectively repeal Measure ULA entirely.
Joe Donlin, director of the United to House LA coalition, which campaigned for the original measure, said the City Council committee made the right call by rejecting broader exemptions.
“By not taking up the extreme calls for broad, 15-year waivers that could cost the program about a third of its revenue, the committee acknowledged that ULA is working,” Donlin said in a statement.
A separate group of housing developers, union workers and advocacy groups calling itself the “Mend It, Don’t End It” coalition has been urging city hall to make changes to ULA. On Friday, the group said it supports the measure, but believes targeted reforms are still needed.
“Independent research shows that Measure ULA has slowed housing production in Los Angeles at a time when we need more housing, not less,” said Melanie Mendoza, a coalition spokesperson.
The debate over ULA's impact played out in the committee room Friday morning. The city's chief legislative analyst reviewed seven independent studies on ULA’s impact. Three of those studies concluded ULA had suppressed housing production and reduced property tax revenues, while four found no meaningful negative impact.
Before ULA took effect, Los Angeles collected about $22 million a month in transfer tax. After that, it dropped to about $13 million. But city legislative analyst Henry Flatt told the committee a similar decline happened in cities without the tax, including Glendale, Long Beach, Pasadena and Santa Clarita.
“We are not currently convinced that Measure ULA has had an extremely negative impact on general fund revenues,” Flatt told the committee.
The county assessor's office read the same period differently. Scott Thornberry, an assistant assessor with L.A. County, told the committee that commercial and industrial property sales are falling in the city but not elsewhere in the county.
“We are seeing, we believe, a trend line of impact to property tax revenue growth in the city of L.A. specifically," Thornberry said.
Instead of the ballot measure, the committee voted to develop a five-year pilot program cutting the ULA tax to 1.5% for newly constructed affordable housing projects that meet specific requirements.
Lee, whose ballot measure was replaced with language advancing the pilot program, said he hadn't seen the substitute prior to Friday’s meeting and voted against it.
“This was just placed in front of me,” he said. Lee objected to a provision in the substitute recommendations calling for $30 million in new spending on homelessness support.
“Without knowing where this money's coming from, I'm going to have to vote no,” he said.
Lee told LAist he supports stronger oversight and technical improvements to Measure ULA, but believes a ballot measure is the right approach.
“Voters deserve the opportunity to consider targeted changes that would preserve the intent of the measure while addressing its unintended impacts on housing production and real estate activity in Los Angeles,” the councilmember said, in a statement.
Friday's meeting was the committee's final scheduled hearing. The committee, which is set to dissolve June 1, also voted to advance a narrower nonprofit tax refund limited to organizations that can prove all sale proceeds went directly to affordable housing.
The committee continued a separate motion on fire exemptions for Palisades fire victims, which will be heard by another council committee. A motion to loosen eligibility rules for the ULA Citizens Oversight Committee was noted and filed.
Councilmember Imelda Padilla, who introduced several of the committee's motions, said the process had been guided by a commitment to protect the measure.
"My goal has always been to listen carefully, bring people into the conversation, and protect ULA while honoring the voters' intent," she said at Friday’s meeting.
In her closing remarks, Jurado reflected on the three-member committee’s past work.
“We released $14 million in rental assistance to the most vulnerable Angelenos and $300 million for affordable housing,” she said. “We did in six or seven meetings what others couldn't do in five years.”
The ad hoc committee's recommendations now move to the full City Council.
Harris-Dawson and Lee’s ballot measure motion will be considered by the City Council’s rules committee at a later date, officials said.
Topline:
The annual movie-monster bash for horror fans returns to the Pasadena Convention Center this weekend. The event features panel discussions, celebrity photo ops, a monster museum, live makeup demos and over 400 exhibitors.
What can I expect: Rub elbows with legendary beastie creators, browse hundreds of vendors who traffic in the weird and unsettling, and marvel at the practical effects that’ll make your flesh creep.
What should I wear: Cosplay as your favorite filmic haunts or don a classic tee celebrating genre history. Just come ready to adore all things that gnaw and gash.
Read on... for more details about the event.
Monsterpalooza, the annual movie-monster bash for horror fans, returns to the Pasadena Convention Center this weekend, starting Friday night (May 29) and lasting through Sunday.
Now in its 18th year, devotees can rub elbows with legendary beastie creators, browse hundreds of vendors who traffic in the weird and unsettling, and marvel at practical effects that’ll make your flesh creep.
Dozens of panels and presentations are scheduled, including a deep-dive into the 95th anniversary of the Dracula and Frankenstein movies by writer Julian David Stone.
Stone said that the two classic movies have left a lasting impact.
“Dracula is a movie about supernatural horror..... and Frankenstein is about technological or man-made horror," he said. "You can just trace those two themes all the way forward to this past year with Sinners and Megan 2.0."
Stone first attended the convention in 2008, returning over the years as a fan, spectator and presenter.
“It’s just a terrific convention that celebrates all things horror,” Stone said. “There’s a lot of celebrities you can meet who were in these horror films and you can get pictures with them." He added that he’ll never forget when he met Carla Laemmle in 2010 — the last living cast member of the original 1931 Dracula.
If you’re jonesing to be photographed with high-profile entertainers (expect a fee for many), this year's event has a line-up that includes musician Alice Cooper, actress Lin Shaye from the Insidious movie franchise and David Howard Thornton, who plays Art the Clown in the popular Terrifier movie series.
Cosplay and crazy costumes are encouraged, although a T-shirt celebrating a classic horror movie will also do. Just come ready to adore all things that gnaw and gash.
Location: 300 E. Green St., Pasadena
Ticket prices at the door: Friday $50, Saturday $55, Sunday $55, 3-day pass $99
Hours: Friday 6 p.m. - 11 p.m., Saturday 11 a.m. - 6 p.m., Sunday 11 a.m. - 6 p.m.
Topline:
Judge Robert Draper is running to keep his seat in the Los Angeles County Superior Court. He’s running under Office No. 2 while facing a challenge from a deputy district attorney — and charges from the California Commission on Judicial Performance alleging that he violated several ethical rules for judges. Here’s what you should know.
Why it matters: The commission has charged Draper with seven counts of violating judicial ethics. His hearing wrapped up earlier this month, but a decision won’t come down until after voters cast their ballots for the primary.
The details: The allegations include willful misconduct in office, failure to perform his duties and actions that affect the judicial office’s reputation. For example, during a hearing, he admitted to saying irrelevant comments about race during a case and calling women in the courthouse “cute” and “attractive.”
Analysis: Draper spoke to LAist and denied many of the allegations, and for ones he doesn’t, he said they didn’t violate ethical rules. We spoke to a legal expert to unpack how voters can make sense of the issues.
Read on... to hear directly from Draper.
California’s primary election is Tuesday — and one race poses a challenging question to voters: Should a judge who’s accused of ethics violations by the state watchdog of judges get re-elected?
That’s the situation for Judge Robert Draper, who’s running to keep his seat in the Los Angeles County Superior Court. With about 15 years on the bench, Draper, 84, told LAist he hasn’t had disciplinary issues until now.
The California Commission on Judicial Performance, the state body that oversees judicial complaints, conducted an investigation into complaints and charged Draper with misconduct in office. The commission’s members, who are also the final decision-makers here, won’t make a determination on whether to discipline him until after the primary.
Here’s what you should know about what’s at stake and what could happen next.
Draper was appointed by former Gov. Jerry Brown in 2012. Superior Court judges have to run for reelection after they’ve been appointed. Draper is running for a third full term and is on the ballot for all L.A. County voters under Office No. 2, facing a challenge from Tal Valbuena, a deputy district attorney.
The commission has charged him with seven counts of violating judicial ethics. (The proceedings against him aren’t civil or criminal, but the commission uses similar terminology.) The commission is an 11-member group of judges, lawyers and others who are appointed by the governor, the Legislature and the California Supreme Court.
Draper is currently assigned to “chambers work only.” He and his attorney told LAist Draper's court-issued email account is restricted and his room does not have a computer or staff. He hasn’t heard a case since he returned in June 2023 from an involuntary leave that, according to commission records, was tied to the alleged ethics violations.
Among the allegations Draper is facing:
A panel of independent “special masters” oversaw a six-day hearing earlier this month on the charges. The special masters are expected to issue a report on their findings within the next several weeks — but a decision on possible disciplinary action still rests with the commission.
According to the commission’s charge document, the allegations against Draper center on willful misconduct in office, failure to perform his duties and actions that affect the judicial office’s reputation. Draper has denied some of the claims and, in an interview with LAist, gave reasons for others.
The commission initially claimed that his behavior was evidence of an unnamed disability that interferes with his duties (which could get judges removed from the bench, if proven), but LAist confirmed that claim has been withdrawn.
Draper told LAist he is navigating health issues. Over the last few years, he’s been prescribed medication that made his Parkinson’s disease worse, he said, and had a detached retina and a rotator cuff injury. He added that he’s also coping with grief — his son died this year shortly before the hearing.
The seven counts Draper faces from the judicial ethics commission cover accusations dated 2022 and 2023. We’ll explore the main ones.
We reviewed hundreds of pages so you don’t have to. If you do want to look them over, here’s where you can find the documents we included in this story:
According to records from the judicial performance commission, Draper admitted to making statements that have been called “irrelevant” and “inappropriate” by other judges who reviewed his decisions on a 2023 case.
In February that year, the defense in a sexual harassment case Draper presided over was seeking a new trial. A jury had reached a verdict earlier, putting them on the hook for $10 million.
During a hearing, Draper brought up his personal views on interracial mixing and Black history, according to excerpts of the court transcripts. Draper told LAist these comments were intended to convince the two sides to “make a reasonable settlement.”
According to the transcripts, Draper used the terms “coal black” and “light brown” to describe Black skin tones. Draper defended his statements, telling LAist he viewed the comments as “almost like describing what color dress you’re wearing today.”
“Now, why did I say it? Race was not involved in the case, except that almost everybody was Black,” he said.
The commission said the comments at issue reflected “bias, prejudice, or harassment.” Draper’s written response to the charges said the dialogue had been taken “wholly out of context.” He told LAist he “ wasn’t talking about a bias for or against” and added he “probably won’t use the word ‘black’ ever” again if re-elected.
“Do I imagine I’ll continue to make comments about appearance? No,” he said. “I probably won’t.”
The same day of the 2023 hearing, Draper brought the all-women legal team into his chambers, according to records, where he made other comments that the commission alleges violated judicial ethics.
During the conversation, he told them a story about how male attorneys used to tell female secretaries “you better be able to f*** better than you can type.” Draper told LAist his comments have been misconstrued to sound like he was bragging about behavior at his last law firm. In fact, he said, he was referring to how other firms had “that attitude towards secretaries” when he started practicing law.
“I was so proud of the country [because] now it wouldn’t happen at all,” he said.
His comments and other issues ultimately led to the California Court of Appeal to overturn the verdict and order a new trial. Draper is also alleged to have touched a lawyer’s hair during proceedings in that case without reason, which he testified before the special masters hearing did not happen.
Other allegations cited by the commission involve multiple comments Draper has admitted to making about women in the courthouse in 2022 and 2023, according to records and LAist’s interview with him. The commission said these statements violated judicial ethics, which Draper disputes.
I’m not going to walk around with my handkerchief in my mouth. I can just say, ‘Hey, you’re looking cute today’ and people understand that.
In one instance, Draper told his presiding judge she “looked cute” when she was mad, according to records. Another time he called a woman involved in a case before him “quite attractive” in a “global way.”
Draper told LAist the language he used was “not a come-on” and that he was “trying to make them feel good about themselves.”
“ I’m not going to walk around with my handkerchief in my mouth. I can just say, ‘Hey, you’re looking cute today,’ and people understand that,” he said. “But I’m not going to be walking around the court picking out the cute ones and telling them they’re cute.”
Draper has also been charged with allegedly not following his courthouse leadership’s directives.
When he was placed on involuntary leave in March 2023, according to the commission, Draper continued to do administrative work on cases despite receiving verbal and written directives to not access the courthouse and its resources.
Draper told LAist his supervisors were aware that his work was continuing because he was emailing them about it.
“They understood what I was doing, and they approved it by not speaking up,” he said.
Draper also testified that he wasn’t immediately told not to work while on leave. The commission said Draper wasn’t “candid” when he testified to that.
The commission also cited problematic emails Draper admitted to sending from his court email address, according to records and his testimony. This included allegations that Draper sent files including nude photos from a confidential court case to people not authorized to receive them under state code.
In June 2023, Draper sent an email to commission staff and other Superior Court judges with various materials, according to records. The attachments included details from a July 2017 confidential child abuse case.
The case involved child sexual abuse allegations with a public figure. Draper emailed nude photos from the case files of children bathing, according to records and his testimony.
One of the recipients of the email with nude photo attachments was retired Judge Lance Ito — best known for presiding over the O.J Simpson murder case in 1995. Ito testified to not being personally acquainted with Draper at the time and called the email “unusual.” Draper testified that the email blast was intended to show his legal contributions and that he is authorized under statute to consult with other judges. He said he copied Ito on the thread because of his leadership role in teaching judges.
Draper also emailed photos of himself “from behind without clothes” to the commission and other judges, according to records. He testified that this was to show his colleagues proof of an injury.
Reporter Cato Hernández covers judicial races during election season. They attended the first day of Judge Robert Draper’s hearing and obtained the rough transcripts for the entire hearing.
They also interviewed Draper and one of his key judicial endorsers, Judge Kimberly Repecka. For analysis, they spoke to Laurie Levenson, a law professor and David W. Burcham Chair in Ethical Advocacy at Loyola Law School.
In another charge, the commission said Draper has not cooperated with its ethics inquiry that started in 2022 — such as repeatedly missing deadlines — and has been disrespectful to commission staff. Draper told LAist the commission’s investigation was more like an inquisition because they didn’t interview him before the hearing.
“ That is a big problem with the way the CJP operates,” he said. “They’re not there to help judges. They’re kinda trying to catch judges.”
Kimberly Repecka is one of four judges who have endorsed Draper for re-election. She’s a prior public defender who’s known Draper for about 10 years and testified in his hearing last month.
She told LAist people have latched on to ageist narratives and that his character is being misrepresented. According to Repecka, it’s common for older judges to share “war stories.”
Repecka defended Draper’s reasoning for bringing up race in the sexual harassment case.
“I think most of us most of the time view it exactly how Judge Draper said he intended it: an attempt to connect on a more human level and remind ourselves that there’s a world bigger than the courtroom and case we’re in,” she said.
Repecka told LAist she wouldn’t use the same words he used to talk about skin color in the courtroom. She would be concerned it could cause discomfort.
“ As a white person, I would be pretty careful about how I address that if it seems relevant to the case itself,” she said.
Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola Law School well-versed in judicial ethics, described it as a “real stretch” to view Draper’s comments on race and appearance as appropriate under any circumstances. Levenson said she can’t imagine other judges talking like this.
“There’s a lot of training for judges that has happened in the last decade about how you don’t talk about race unless it is a relevant issue,” she said, “and you especially don’t use some of the terms that Judge Draper was using in these hearings.”
Judges need to watch what they say in a courtroom because they need to not only be fair, but appear to be fair, Levenson said.
“He has the ethical obligation to be impartial and how he demonstrates that he’s being impartial is going to be evaluated by how he acts and what he says in the courtroom,” she said. “If you take his words at face value, there certainly would be reason to question how he’s treating people in that courtroom.”
Levenson has reviewed the hearing’s rough transcripts, the charges and Draper’s filed answer to them. She said it appears the commission “bent over backwards” to give him a fair chance during their “robust” process.
The next step is for the special masters to put together a report of their conclusions for the commission members, which Draper will have a chance to respond to. The special masters won’t make recommendations about discipline.
That choice rests with the commission members. Remember, they brought these charges against Draper and will decide the outcome, likely in a couple of months. Among the options: The commission members could clear him, admonish or censure him, or remove him from office.
Loyola Marymount University is an underwriting sponsor of LAist. Like other funders, it has no influence on coverage.
Topline:
A former Arcadia mayor pleaded guilty Friday to acting as an “illegal agent” for China, according to court documents. She resigned from her position with the city earlier this month.
The charges: Eileen Wang, 58, was charged with one count of acting as an illegal agent of a foreign government, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office. The charge carries a potential sentence of up to 10 years in federal prison. Wang’s legal team did not immediately respond to LAist’s request for comment.
Who else was involved: According to prosecutors, Wang and Yaoning “Mike” Sun of Chino Hills worked at the direction of the Chinese government and with people based in the U.S. to promote pro-People’s Republic of China propaganda in the United States. Those actions occurred between 2020 and 2022, prosecutors said. Sun, 65, pleaded guilty in October 2025 in federal court to acting as an illegal agent of a foreign government. He is serving a four-year federal prison sentence.
What else: Arcadia said in a post on its website that a new mayor would be picked from the remaining council members at the next meeting.
Dana Littlefield contributed to this story.
