Sponsor
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • LAist listeners on where to find a moment of zen
    laurel_canyon_rainbow.jpg
    A rainbow is seen over Laurel Canyon.

    Listeners of LAist's daily talk show AirTalk with Larry Mantle recently shared some of their favorite places to reset and find balance in Los Angeles — from iconic vistas to some more personal picks.

    Peace in nature: Many listeners touted the natural landscape of Southern California as being the key to their catharsis, like Robert in Hollywood, who likes to ride his motorcycle through Malibu vistas.

    Peace in metropolis: Other listeners centered themselves by being around others, like Roxanne in Redlands, who likes to take the MetroLink from San Bernardino to Union Station to be alone while still surrounded by others.

    Peace anywhere not online: A recurring theme was places where everyone was offline, like Nicholas in Venice Beach, who likes watching the roller disco in Venice Beach.

    Read on... to find out more relaxing spots in SoCal, and to hear AirTalk host Larry Mantle's picks.

    As a newer resident of Los Angeles, I sometimes find the place overwhelming. Luckily, listeners of LAist's daily talk show AirTalk with Larry Mantle recently and generously shared some of their favorite places to reset and find balance — from iconic vistas to some more personal picks.

    Embracing the natural word

    A trail passes winds through a mountain. A cityscape is in the distance.
    Hikers utilize the trails at Griffith Park in Los Angeles.
    (
    Andrew Cullen
    /
    LAist
    )

    Many listeners touted the natural landscape of Southern California as being the key to their catharsis.

    Robert in Hollywood likes to ride his motorcycle out to the Malibu mountains. “There’s a certain turnout where you can stop and in the spring you can look at all the mustards and the poppies. It’s like a whole other world,” he said.

    Jennifer in Indian Wells takes her easel out and does "en plen aire" painting in the Santa Rosa Mountains. “That can transport me pretty easy,” she said.

    True in High Desert heads to the Mormon Rocks in the Cajon Pass “to hike and be with nature”

    Lori in Studio City wrote, “I am so fortunate that I just go to my backyard and enjoy the birds and squirrels and swaying trees. Living in the hills off Laurel Canyon in Studio City is heavenly.”

    Being alone in a crowd

    A train is at a platform. It has a double-deck.
    Metrolink train at Union Station.
    (
    Laser1987/Getty Images/iStockphoto
    /
    iStockphoto
    )

    Other listeners centered themselves by being around others.

    Roxanne in Redlands likes to take the MetroLink from San Bernardino to Union Station. “I find my greatest peace being alone where there are as many people as people,” she explained.

    A recurring theme was places where everyone was offline.

    Debbie in Lake Balboa said the Travel Town railroad museum reminds her of a different time. “It’s a great place to go to watch families having a good time without screens in an old fashioned way," she said. "Even though you’re alone you have people around you.”

    Nicholas in Venice Beach likes to watch the roller disco in Venice Beach — in person. “A lot of things are online right now,” he said. “It’s just nice to go out and see real people smiling…there’s a lot of community there.

    Listen to the full AirTalk segment for Larry’s memories of listeners’ favorite spot below:

    Listen 16:58
    How do you restore your emotional and mental state after a chaotic or stressful day?

  • Batch of emails reveal prominent connections

    Topline:

    Spread throughout the roughly 23,000 documents released by the House Oversight Committee last week, emails and texts show Epstein courted prominent politicos from both sides of the aisle, impressed academics and used his connections to push back on negative stories about his alleged crimes.

    Who did Epstein correspond with?: Epstein's career as a wealthy financier who gave money to universities and other causes put him in many elite circles. Among them is linguist Noam Chomsky, who called Epstein a "highly valued friend." Chomsky recalled how Epstein connected him with former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak — another frequent Epstein correspondent. Also, Kathryn Ruemmler, former White House counsel in the Obama administration and current chief legal officer for Goldman Sachs, messaged with Epstein before and during President Donald Trump's first term.

    Mentions of Trump: President Trump is a frequent subject of emails and text messages in the latest file tranche — well over a thousand different mentions — though mainly the subject of Epstein's near-obsession with his presidency, as the latter positioned himself as a Trump whisperer of sorts to his powerful associates.

    What's next: Within 30 days of Trump signing the Epstein Files Transparency Act, the attorney general is supposed to make "all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials" available in a searchable and downloadable format.

    New releases from Jeffrey Epstein's estate shine additional light on the array of powerful figures who kept ties to the disgraced financier after his criminal charges came to light.

    Spread throughout the roughly 23,000 documents released by the House Oversight Committee last week, emails and texts show Epstein courted prominent politicos from both sides of the aisle, impressed academics and used his connections to push back on negative stories about his alleged crimes.

    Epstein's career as a wealthy financier who gave money to universities and other causes put him in many elite circles.

    Those circles did not entirely close to him after he pleaded guilty to state charges of solicitation of prostitution and of solicitation of prostitution with a minor under the age of 18 in 2008.

    Reading through the text messages and emails released, the people who consulted with Epstein rarely acknowledged the severity of the crimes that required him to register as a sex offender, though simply corresponding with Epstein does not implicate individuals in his criminal activities, convicted or accused.

    There's an apparent letter of recommendation for Epstein from linguist Noam Chomsky, calling him a "highly valued friend," that recalled how Epstein connected him with former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak — another frequent Epstein correspondent.

    "Jeffrey constantly raises searching questions and puts forth provocative ideas, which have repeatedly led me to rethink crucial issues," the letter reads.

    There's advice Epstein gave to Steve Bannon, Trump's former strategist, about ways to build a far-right political movement overseas.

    "If you are going to play here, you'll have to spend time, [E]urope by remote doesn't work," Epstein wrote in 2018. "Lots and lots of face time and hand holding. Europe can be a wife not a mistress."

    Former Harvard University president and onetime Treasury Secretary Larry Summers is documented numerous times having intimate personal chats with Epstein, including asking for romantic advice and joking about women's intelligence.

    "I yipped about inclusion," wrote Summers in 2017. "I observed that half the IQ [in the] world was possessed by women without mentioning they are more than 51 percent of population...."

    Summers resigned as Harvard's president in 2006 after arguing that women may be innately less capable in math and science.

    In the week since the latest Epstein emails release, he has resigned from the board of OpenAI and abruptly left his teaching role at Harvard, as the university announced a probe of "information concerning individuals at Harvard included in the newly released Jeffrey Epstein documents to evaluate what actions may be warranted."

    Summers isn't the only high-profile Democrat who found themself in varying degrees of Epstein's orbit. Kathryn Ruemmler, former White House counsel in the Obama administration and current chief legal officer for Goldman Sachs, messaged with Epstein before and during Trump's first term.

    "Trump is living proof of the adage that it is better to be lucky than smart," she wrote in August 2015.

    "I regret ever knowing Jeffrey Epstein," Ruemmler told The Wall Street Journal in 2023.

    More than a thousand mentions of Trump

    A protester with white hair, wearing a black baseball cap is pictured from behind. They are holding up a sign that reads," release all the files!"
    A protester holds a sign related to the release of the Jeffrey Epstein case files outside the Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Nov.12. President Trump signed the congressional legislation that directs the Department of Justice to release the files late Wednesday evening.
    (
    Saul Loeb
    /
    AFP via Getty Images
    )

    Trump promised to release the Epstein files on the campaign trail but largely stonewalled the effort this year since he returned to office, frequently calling the push for more transparency around the Epstein case a "hoax" perpetrated by Democrats.

    In a Wednesday Truth Social post announcing the signing of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, Trump said Democrats were using the issue to distract from what he says are victories for his administration.

    "Perhaps the truth about these Democrats, and their associations with Jeffrey Epstein, will soon be revealed, because I HAVE JUST SIGNED THE BILL TO RELEASE THE EPSTEIN FILES!" he posted.

    The president has the authority to release the files without congressional action.

    Trump is a frequent subject of emails and text messages in the latest file tranche — well over a thousand different mentions — though mainly the subject of Epstein's near-obsession with his presidency, as the latter positioned himself as a Trump whisperer of sorts to his powerful associates.

    This week, after an abrupt reversal that led to the near-unanimous approval of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, the president has now called for Democrats mentioned in Epstein's communications to be investigated by the Justice Department.

    "I will be asking A.G. Pam Bondi, and the Department of Justice, together with our great patriots at the FBI, to investigate Jeffrey Epstein's involvement and relationship with Bill Clinton, Larry Summers, Reid Hoffman, J.P. Morgan, Chase, and many other people and institutions, to determine what was going on with them, and him," Trump wrote on Truth Social.

    Other Republicans are going on the offensive too — highlighting revelations that Epstein was texting Democratic Del. Stacey Plaskett of the U.S. Virgin Islands during a House Oversight Committee hearing with Trump's former attorney Michael Cohen in 2019.

    Comparing the newly released messages with the video of the hearing, minutes after Epstein suggested Plaskett ask Cohen things about the Trump Organization, Plaskett posed similar questions.

    An effort to censure Plaskett in the House failed Tuesday. In a floor speech, Plaskett defended her actions as receiving information from a constituent and said it was "not public knowledge at that time that he was under federal investigation."

    Amid the partisan finger-pointing around the Epstein files, some of Epstein's accusers are imploring the president not to make things partisan and focus on the other powerful people that they say haven't faced scrutiny — regardless of political party.

    What's next for the government's Epstein files?

    Within 30 days of Trump signing the Epstein Files Transparency Act, the attorney general is supposed to make "all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials" available in a searchable and downloadable format.

    That includes information that relates to Epstein, his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell and "individuals named or referenced in connection with Epstein's criminal activities."

    There's also a focus on information regarding plea deals and decisions not to charge Epstein for other alleged crimes, as well as documents pertaining to his 2019 death by suicide in federal custody.

    Over the summer, the FBI put out a memo that said their files include "a significant amount of material, including more than 300 gigabytes of data and physical evidence."

    Some of that includes photos and videos of Epstein's accusers, including minors, and disturbing material that will not be made public. The bill from Congress also says anything "that would jeopardize an active federal investigation or ongoing prosecution" can be withheld or redacted, too.

    With Trump's ordering of the investigation into Democrats and financial institutions mentioned in the Epstein correspondence, it is unclear how much of the Justice Department's files will be released, to what extent they will be redacted and when they ultimately will be made public.

    Copyright 2025 NPR

  • Sponsored message
  • Groups warn against AI toys ahead of holidays

    Topline:

    A nonprofit children's safety organization, Fairplay, is urging gift givers to avoid buying AI toys for children this holiday season, according to an advisory issued on Thursday.

    Why it matters: Fairplay's advisory, headlined "AI Toys are NOT safe for kids," says these toys prey on children's trust and disrupt human relationships, among other harms. The advisory was endorsed by more than 150 experts and groups including MIT professor and author Sherry Turkle, pediatrician and researcher Jenny Radesky, Social Media Victims Law Center, and International Play Association USA.

    Others share concerns: The consumer rights nonprofit's 40th annual "Trouble in Toyland" report says some AI toys enable in-depth talk about sexually explicit topics, have few parental controls, and collect a mountain of data about their underage owners.

    Read on... for more what groups are saying about AI toys.

    A nonprofit children's safety organization, Fairplay, is urging gift givers to avoid buying AI toys for children this holiday season, according to an advisory issued on Thursday.

    Fairplay, along with other child and consumer advocacy groups, say these toys – playthings like plushies, dolls, action figures, and kids' robots embedded with chatbots and other artificial intelligence technologies – can be dangerous.

    Designed to mimic human behaviors and interact with kids as if they were friends, the toys offer novelty at a time when AI is starting to infiltrate many corners of peoples' lives.

    Fairplay's advisory, headlined "AI Toys are NOT safe for kids," says these toys prey on children's trust and disrupt human relationships, among other harms. The advisory was endorsed by more than 150 experts and groups including MIT professor and author Sherry Turkle, pediatrician and researcher Jenny Radesky, Social Media Victims Law Center, and International Play Association USA.

    "It's ridiculous to expect young children to avoid potential harm here," said Rachel Franz, a Fairplay program director, in a statement to NPR. "Young children are especially susceptible to the potential harms of these toys, such as invading their privacy, collecting data, engendering false trust and friendship, and displacing what they need to thrive, like human-to-human interactions and time to play with all their senses. These can have long and short-term impacts on development."

    Others share concerns


    The advisory follows similar recent warnings from the Public Interest Research Group (PIRG). The consumer rights nonprofit's 40th annual "Trouble in Toyland" report says some AI toys enable in-depth talk about sexually explicit topics, have few parental controls, and collect a mountain of data about their underage owners.

    "All of them are collecting your child's voices, potentially. They're collecting their names, their dates of birth. All kinds of information – the kid's likes, dislikes, favorite toys, favorite friends," said Teresa Murray, co-author of the PIRG report and director of its consumer watchdog program, in an interview with NPR. "Because they're connected to the internet, so anything is available, who knows what those toys might start talking to your children about with their friends or their friends' parents or your neighborhood? I mean, it's terrifying."

    Toy industry and AI players highlight safety and privacy


    The toy industry and AI companies are responding to such fears by highlighting their focus on safety and privacy.

    OpenAI said it suspended the maker of the AI-powered teddy bear Kumma earlier this week, after PIRG reported the toy was sharing questionable advice with minors, such as providing details about how to find and ignite matches. When prompted by researchers, it also talked in-depth about sexual matters. "We suspended this developer [the Singapore-based toymaker FoloToy] for violating our policies," OpenAI spokesperson Gaby Raila said in an email to NPR. "Our usage policies prohibit any use of our services to exploit, endanger, or sexualize anyone under 18 years old. These rules apply to every developer using our API, and we monitor and enforce them to ensure our services are not used to harm minors."  

    The company's technologies are also embedded in other AI toys including the AI robot pet Loona, and it entered into a strategic partnership with Mattel earlier this year "to support AI-powered products and experiences based on Mattel's brands." No products have yet been announced. But the company said the initial set of Mattel products and experiences will focus on families and older customers, not users under 13.

    Fairplay singled out several AI toys to demonstrate the potential risks of data collection and the impact on a child's understanding of trust. Among them are Miko, a cute plastic robot that comes with educational games and the tagline "Built to be your new best friend," Loona Petbot, a small, plastic robot companion that moves around on wheels and has a screen and ear-like, and Gabbo, a cube-shaped robot plushy with big anime-style eyes. It has no screen, but can be connected to wifi and do voice chat. NPR has reached out to the makers of these products for comment.

    "Children's safety is our top priority," said Curio, the company behind Gabbo and other AI playthings, in a statement to NPR. "Our guardrails are meticulously designed to protect kids, and we encourage parents to monitor conversations, track insights, and choose the controls that work best for their family on the Curio: Interactive Toys app."

    "Facial recognition on Miko 3 is entirely optional and exists solely to help families enjoy a more personalized and interactive experience," said Ritvik Sharma, a senior vice president at Miko.ai, in an email to NPR. "Importantly, all visual data is processed locally on the device. It is never sent to the cloud or shared externally. To offer families greater confidence and control, every Miko robot includes a physical camera shutter that allows parents to completely block the camera whenever they choose."

    In an email to NPR, The Toy Association, which represents toy manufacturers, said toys sold by responsible manufacturers and retailers must adhere to more than 100 strict federal safety standards and tests, including the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, which governs children's privacy and data security online and is overseen by the Federal Trade Commission. "The Toy Association urges parents and caregivers to shop only from reputable toymakers, brands, and retailers who prioritize children's safety above all else," the statement said, adding that it offers safety tips for A.I. and other connected products to better inform peoples' buying decisions.
    Copyright 2025 NPR

  • Trump signed bill releasing doc, what's next

    Topline:

    President Donald Trump has signed a bill to compel the Justice Department to make public its case files on the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, a potentially far-reaching development in a yearslong push by survivors of Epstein's abuse for a public reckoning.

    Why now: Both the House and Senate passed the bill this week with overwhelming margins after Trump reversed course on his monthslong opposition to the bill and indicated he would sign it.

    What does the bill do? The bill compels Attorney General Pam Bondi to release essentially everything the Justice Department has collected over multiple federal investigations into Epstein, as well as his longtime confidante and girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell.

    Read on... for what to expect for this 30-day countdown to produce the files.

    President Donald Trump has signed a bill to compel the Justice Department to make public its case files on the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, a potentially far-reaching development in a yearslong push by survivors of Epstein's abuse for a public reckoning.

    Both the House and Senate passed the bill this week with overwhelming margins after Trump reversed course on his monthslong opposition to the bill and indicated he would sign it. Now that the bill has been signed by the president, there's a 30-day countdown for the Justice Department to produce what's commonly known as the Epstein files.

    "This bill is a command for the president to be fully transparent, to come fully clean, and to provide full honesty to the American people," Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Wednesday.

    Schumer added that Democrats were ready to push back if they perceive that the president is doing anything but adhering to "full transparency."

    In a social media post Wednesday as he announced he had signed the bill, Trump wrote, "Democrats have used the 'Epstein' issue, which affects them far more than the Republican Party, in order to try and distract from our AMAZING Victories."


    The swift, bipartisan work in Congress this week was a response to the growing public demand that the Epstein files be released, especially as attention focuses on his connections to global leaders including Trump, former President Bill Clinton, Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, who has already been stripped of his royal title as Prince Andrew over the matter, and many others.

    There is plenty of public anticipation about what more the files could reveal. Yet the bill will most likely trigger a rarely seen baring of a sprawling federal investigation, also creating the potential for unintended consequences.

    What does the bill do?

    The bill compels Attorney General Pam Bondi to release essentially everything the Justice Department has collected over multiple federal investigations into Epstein, as well as his longtime confidante and girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year prison sentence for luring teenage girls for the disgraced financier. Those records total around 100,000 pages, according to a federal judge who has reviewed the case.

    It will also compel the Justice Department to produce all its internal communications on Epstein and his associates and his 2019 death in a Manhattan jail cell as he awaited charges for sexually abusing and trafficking dozens of teenage girls.

    The legislation, however, exempts some parts of the case files. The bill's authors made sure to include that the Justice Department could withhold personally identifiable information of victims, child sexual abuse materials and information deemed by the administration to be classified for national defense or foreign policy.

    "We will continue to follow the law with maximum transparency while protecting victims," Bondi told a news conference Wednesday when asked about releasing the files.

    The bill also allows the Justice Department to withhold information that would jeopardize active investigations or prosecutions. That's created some worry among the bill's proponents that the department would open active investigations into people named in the Epstein files in order to shield that material from public view.

    Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a longtime Trump loyalist who has had a prominent split with Trump over the bill, said Tuesday that she saw the administration's compliance with the bill as its "real test."

    "Will the Department of Justice release the files, or will it all remain tied up in investigations?" she asked.

    In July, the FBI said in a memo regarding the Epstein investigation that, "we did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties." But Bondi last week complied with Trump's demands and ordered a federal prosecutor to investigate Epstein's ties to the president's political foes, including Clinton.

    Still, Rep. Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican who sponsored the bill, said "there's no way they can have enough investigations to cover" all of the people he believes are implicated in Epstein's abuse.

    "And if they do, then good," he added.

    The bill also requires the Justice Department to produce reports on what materials it withheld, as well as redactions made, within 15 days of the release of the files. It stipulates that officials can't withhold or redact anything "on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary."

    Who could be named?

    There's a widely held expectation that many people could be named in case files for investigations that spanned over a decade — and some concern that just because someone is named, that person would be assumed guilty or complicit.

    Epstein was a luminary who kept company with heads of state, influential political figures, academics and billionaires. The release of his emails and messages by a House Oversight Committee investigation last week has already shown his connections with — and private conversations about — Trump and many other high-powered figures.

    Yet federal prosecutors follow carefully constructed guidelines about what information they produce publicly and at trial, both to protect victims and to uphold the fairness of the legal system. House Speaker Mike Johnson raised objections to the bill on those grounds this week, arguing that it could reveal unwanted information on victims as well as others who were in contact with investigators.

    Still, Johnson did not actually try to make changes to the bill and voted for it on the House floor.

    For the bill's proponents, a public reckoning over the investigation is precisely the point. Some of the survivors of trafficking from Epstein and Maxwell have sought ways to name people they accuse of being complicit or involved, but fear they will face lawsuits from the men they accuse.

    Massie said that he wants the FBI to release the reports from its interviews with the victims.

    Those reports typically contain unvetted information, but Massie said he is determined to name those who are accused. He and Greene have offered to read the names of those accused on the House floor, which would shield their speech from legal consequences. "We need names," Massie said.
    Copyright 2025 NPR

  • What happened to girl group sensation NewJeans?
    five women dressed in black and white high fashion clothes descend a large staircase covered in a blue carpet together
    The members of K-pop girl group NewJeans walk the blue carpet during Fashion Week at Dongdaemun Design Plaza in Seoul on Sept. 3, 2024.

    Topline:

    The industry famous for its finely honed artist development method, sometimes called the "K-pop formula," has always lived with this tension: a creative philosophy with proven results, and a near-constant struggle for fairer relations between performers and the adults who oversee them.

    Background: In April 2024, NewJeans found itself caught in a quarrel between two corporate masters. On one side stood the top brass at HYBE, the largest of the country's "big four" entertainment agencies since it went public in 2020. On the other was one of their deputies: Min Hee-jin, CEO and founder of ADOR, who had launched NewJeans in 2022 and served as a creative director for its music.

    Read on ... for the inside story of what happened to one of K-pop's most original acts.

    In March 2024, when the K-pop girl group NewJeans was awarded group of the year at Billboard's Women in Music event, the crew was presented the honor by the unlikeliest of advocates: country star Lainey Wilson, who hinted at the distance between their respective worlds and this rare opportunity to bridge them. "It's a place where a gal who grew up in a small farming community in Louisiana gets to shine a light on an incredible group of K-pop performers from halfway across the globe," she said, applause roaring out before the group's name was even spoken. Indeed, the prized pony of ADOR, a sub-label of the juggernaut K-pop company HYBE, had spent the previous year affirming itself as an exciting next step in the genre's evolution. Billboard felt like the perfect American institution to recognize this leap: The 2023 EP Get Up had made NewJeans only the second K-pop girl group to top the Billboard 200, after Blackpink. But as the group performed "Super Shy" and "ETA," Get Up's hits, the distance between the two units couldn't have been more apparent. Blackpink was the final benchmark of an old K-pop model; NewJeans was a brand new one.

    For one thing, there was a profound understatement to the NewJeans performance — members gliding in and out of the lead spot with uncanny precision, distinct from the flamboyant mini-showcases that had come before. The sparkling fits, flowy choreo and muted music were impressive on their own, but the rush was in how seamlessly they worked together, telling a story about style. Where many K-pop groups spend their press runs trying to be all things to all listeners, NewJeans had spent its breakout year building an aesthetic niche to live in. Where some K-pop singles are so obsessed with now-ness that they feel out of time the moment they're born, NewJeans' songs seemed to be angling for something timeless. For a moment, it looked as if the group could be K-pop's future — if not a bellwether then at least a new barometer, and a message to the industry to reconsider how it does business. Yet only a month after the Billboard ceremony, that horizon became clouded in uncertainty: A power struggle erupted within HYBE for control of NewJeans' future, benching the group for over a year and dividing its fanbase. A surprise announcement this month promises that NewJeans will be back, but the long absence leading to this unsteady return has felt, to those paying attention to the genre's scandals over the years, like the latest evidence of a lingering rot.

    Even many superfans will tell you that K-pop's pageantry has often masked a troubled business model, where impressionable young trainees commit to a life run entirely by their agencies. Signing on the dotted line can come with extraordinary expectations: plastic surgery, disordered eating, heavy restrictions on socializing. South Korea's Fair Trade Commission finally capped K-pop contracts at seven years after a 2009 controversy around the boy band TVXQ, who coined the term "slave contract" to describe its own 13-year agreement. K-pop was also at ground zero for the rise of toxic stan culture, from the doxxing of journalists to the cyberbullying of artists; one such star, Sulli of the girl group f(x), died by suicide in the midst of unrelenting harassment. Concerns over these practices have been a public talking point for years, but reform efforts rarely stick: In 2019, Yang Hyun-suk, co-founder of YG Entertainment, was forced to step down from the label after threatening a whistleblower to cover up a drug allegation facing one of his artists; he has since returned to YG and is helming the girl group Babymonster.

    The industry famous for its finely honed artist development method, sometimes called the "K-pop formula," has always lived with this tension: a creative philosophy with proven results, and a near-constant struggle for fairer relations between performers and the adults who oversee them. The latest and most public installment in this fight began last spring, with an outlier act suddenly at the center of the story.

    In April 2024, NewJeans found itself caught in a quarrel between two corporate masters. On one side stood the top brass at HYBE, the largest of the country's "big four" entertainment agencies since it went public in 2020. On the other was one of their deputies: Min Hee-jin, CEO and founder of ADOR, who had launched NewJeans in 2022 and served as a creative director for its music. An industry veteran by the time she joined HYBE in 2019, Min had arrived touting progressive ideas for managing talent, already positioning her next group as an alternative to K-pop's star system. HYBE had given her the keys, but now alleged that an internal audit revealed she sought to seize total control of ADOR — and took steps to fire her. Min denied such a thing was possible, and claimed the falling-out actually stemmed from her complaints that the company had sidelined NewJeans, stifling its growth in favor of other girl groups it was launching. That August, ADOR announced Min had stepped down as CEO, while the producer insisted she had been forced out.

    When asked, in an interview with the English-language newspaper Korea JoongAng Daily, why she and NewJeans were so committed to working together, Min attributed the closeness to her unique style of artist development, saying:

    “I have had many thoughts and concerns after nearly 20 years in the entertainment industry. I felt it was crucial to change the rigid dynamic between producers and artists. I was concerned about how to guide young artists in a way that benefits their lives and the industry as a whole. In that context, NewJeans is like a child that comes from my heart and mind. Beyond my personal desire to support them, I aim to establish a new kind of relationship within a business model as a producer. That’s why I’m committed to this challenge and refuse to back down easily.”

    Throughout the ordeal, the five members of NewJeans — Minji (now 21), Hanni (21), Danielle (20), Haerin (19) and Hyein (17) — publicly supported Min and called for her reinstatement, saying they would not continue without her. HYBE suggested a compromise: Min could stay on, but in a limited role as a music producer, an offer Min quickly denounced as a mockery of her mission. "It is contradictory to accuse me of breach of trust while offering me a producer role. I chose to join because HYBE claimed they wanted to create a new wave and flow in K-pop. If those aspects hadn't been guaranteed, I wouldn't have even joined the company," she said in an interview with Japan's TV Asahi/ANN News program News Station. The only tenable way forward, she argued, was for her to continue as CEO, managing business and production in tandem.

    By then, the issue had grown bigger than Min, with the NewJeans girls voicing their own criticisms of the parent company. Last September, in an impromptu YouTube livestream that played like a hostage video, the members called HYBE inhumane, detailing mistreatment and harassment. A month later, Hanni testified, through tears, before the South Korean National Assembly's Environment and Labor Committee, as a reference witness for an audit being conducted around workplace harassment and artist protection in the entertainment industry. She spoke about discrimination she and her groupmates faced at HYBE, and the resulting distrust. The case was ultimately dismissed, with the committee ruling that members of K-pop groups are not workers, and therefore are not entitled to labor protections.

    Finally, on Nov. 28, 2024, NewJeans took matters into its own hands. At a press conference, the members announced the termination of their exclusive contract with ADOR, and vowed to seek the right to continue independently under the NewJeans name. The industry moved swiftly against them, with the Korea Management Federation and Korea Entertainment Producers' Association both siding with the company, the latter calling the act childish. Attempts to freelance under a new name, NJZ, were quickly thwarted. The group performed for the last time in February 2025, headlining at ComplexCon Hong Kong.

    It took a year of legal limbo, with the group's musical activities stopped cold, before a pair of decisions put an end to the suspense. On Oct. 30, 2025, Seoul Central District Court ruled in favor of ADOR, saying that NewJeans must honor its contract and stay with the label through 2029. The members initially stuck to their guns, saying in a statement, "It is impossible to return to ADOR and continue normal entertainment activities under the current situation where the trust relationship with ADOR has completely broken down." They vowed to appeal the ruling, a case legal experts estimated would not be heard until well into 2026. Then came a twist that few saw coming: On Nov. 12, ADOR announced in a press release that the group's two youngest members, Hyein and Haerin, would be returning to the label, with no word on Minji, Danielle and Hanni. A few hours later, the three holdouts announced their intention to return as well — but through a news article, saying they had contacted ADOR but had not yet heard back. The label's response was a reluctant one: "We are confirming the authenticity of their intentions."

    That abrupt, staggered homecoming may be the perfect distillation of the conflicting ideologies that have swirled around the group from all sides. Local reports claimed that Hyein's father — who had so strongly opposed their leaving the label that he entered a civil dispute with his wife over legal guardianship, citing a need for an "environment where Hyein could focus on her career" — was instrumental in bringing the younger girls back to ADOR. In contrast, The Korea Herald reported that Minji's mother had been a vocal supporter of Min and her position in the fight with HYBE. Meanwhile, Min herelf had moved on, announcing the start of her own indie agency just ahead of the court verdict. But she did release a statement giving her blessing for the group's return to ADOR, with the parting wish that they remain united. "I can begin anew anywhere. But I believe that NewJeans must remain whole as five," Min said. "I hope the members grow stronger and become an even better NewJeans, and above all, I wish happiness for all five members."

    The end of Min's label experiment points to something bigger at play, a tug-of-war that has long felt inescapable within K-pop. During the peak of the dispute, HYBE and the courts asserted there would be no disruption to the NewJeans operation under the proposed changes. But Min had intentionally designed ADOR, a boutique imprint with NewJeans as its only artist, to run counter to the HYBE system, binding artists' and producers' fates together in ways frankly radical for the genre. "I wanted to have all of these come together," Min told Fast Company, describing the balance of art and commerce that made up her fantasy K-pop outfit. "My definition of cool music, with my definition of a cool picture, with my definition of a great business. Business is, of course, important because if you don't make money with art, it would be kind of useless."

    Before launching ADOR, Min was one of the defining figures in K-pop aesthetics. As the creative director at SM Entertainment, she styled and designed concepts for Girls' Generation, SHINee, EXO, f(x) and Red Velvet, becoming the highest-paid woman in the industry in the process. "I accomplished a lot of things when I was at SM, and I left because I was not really satisfied with my life there," she told Fast Company. "But I'm not saying that I came here because I love this company; I needed a place where I could actualize my vision." The ADOR way — which is to say, the NewJeans blueprint — was to defy what Min called "conventional K-pop idol grammar" and create a group for non-fanatics: a smooth, iterative sound that never resolves, snappy enough to generate earworms yet compact enough to not overstay its welcome.

    "For most K-pop songs, there's always an intro and then the climax and the tension relieves again, because people think that having loops is boring," Min said in that interview. She was specifically referencing NewJeans' club-pop confection "Super Shy," which artfully defies this climax-release principle by converting liquid drum and bass into blissful Powerpuff pizzazz. The song was co-written and -arranged by the Danish singer-songwriter Erika de Casier, and is imbued with her soft-focused, nostalgic take on Y2K-era R&B. In it, you can hear the NewJeans model at full bore: loopy, sugar-rush songcraft accented by airbrushed vocals. But most important is its holism: It is streamlined, even graceful, where many other K-pop recordings feel like Megazord constructions of the myriad artists who work on them. (EXO-K's "History," for example, has two different bridges, one of which feels beamed in from a completely different song.)

    The fragmented approach can be its own kind of endearing, but stitching together bits of tracks was not Min's way. "There is a reason why we have composers make the songs! Sometimes, we'll adjust the top line, but we never go as far as to damage the real intention of the song," she said. Min's production MO was pointed defiantly away from the tried and true way of doing things, which took some collaborators by surprise. "One of the first questions they asked me was, 'Do you listen a lot to K-pop?' " de Casier told GQ in 2023. "And I got so nervous and I had to be honest and said, 'No, I haven't yet explored that genre.' And they're like, 'Good, because we want something new. We want something fresh.' "

    K-pop can often sound oddly anachronistic, even when aiming at an explicitly retro sound, but NewJeans spun a mirage of the past into a modern teenage dream. The touchstones weren't unique ('90s streetwear, early aughts American prep, teen dramas), nor were the genres at play (new jack swing, synth-pop, Jersey and Baltimore club, Miami bass, throwback R&B); it was the ways in which they were remixed, the sense of curation and harmony at work and the way it all slotted neatly into a TikTok-induced optimization. A lot has been made of NewJeans' minimalism as a refreshing counter to K-pop maximalism, but the real innovation was its sepia-toned feel: K-pop as a moodboard come alive, revitalizing the old to the point of a full revolution. Some portion of that has to be attributed to the impresario-auteur at the reins and her master plan. "These days people use the word producer kind of interchangeably as a composer. I'm a producer, but I don't make songs," Min said. "I plan strategies."

    It is only through such acumen that you get the synergy of a dot-com-era obsessive like de Casier calibrating the group's filter for maximum effect. She is far from the first inspired pairing of choice Westerner and ascendant K-pop group — the late SOPHIE produced for ITZY; Carly Rae Jepsen co-wrote an f(x) song; Troye Sivan and Charli XCX worked on music for the giants BTS and TWICE, respectively — but in many of those songs you can often feel the discord of trying to force those artists to adapt to the agencies' market-tested structure. So much of the NewJeans synthesis came from those brought onto the creative team having no clue how K-pop usually works. "It's hard [for me] to say how their music differs from other K‑pop songs — I think it's better for music critics to comment on that," Ylva Dimberg, one of the group's recurring writers and producers, told The Face. The primary NewJeans producer, 250, put forth a theory of K-pop music that seemed to align with the group's mandate: He asked a Swedish friend who headed a K-pop songwriting team what K-pop was, because he didn't really know, and the friend said it could be anything. "People talk about 'the formula of K-pop.' But I don't really understand that, because K-pop is really just pop music made by Koreans," he told Nylon. "So whatever we do, we don't need to follow any specific rules because no one can tell us something we made isn't K-pop."

    Not following rules seems to be precisely the strategy Min envisioned. To 250's point, the idea of a genre as omnivorous as K-pop having a central sound is ridiculous, but a unique song framework can still stand out. Most NewJeans songs don't have bridges; none have obligatory rap verses. All feel like they have been stripped to their essential parts, stringing hooks together like embroidery floss along a friendship bracelet, and all have a perfect grasp on the balance between Western and Eastern pop sensibilities. Much of that equilibrium seems to begin with the sessions themselves and the collaborators put in the room: a marriage between outsiders from the Korean industry and niche Scandinavian artists, adding up to an unfussy fusionist's phantasmagoria.

    It should be said: While ADOR's anti-system stance paid off handsomely as a creative ethic, it proved less effective in remaking the industry at the administrative level. Min was never a K-pop socialist — revolutionary by industry standards, certainly, but still longed to be a CEO fronting a business — and in time she inevitably found herself playing by the house rules, subject to the same industry politicking as other K-pop executives. (Among the evidence cited in October's court ruling were unearthed Slack messages from Min ordering subordinates to dig up dirt on other HYBE artists, which the court saw as grounds to declare breach of trust, misuse of personal information, infringement of trade secrets, defamation and abuse of power.) No one person could overhaul the entire enterprise, but Min's undoing feels like an especially revealing lesson in the limits of the master's tools.

    K-pop is a copycat league. Not just in the musical sense — as when Girls' Generation ripped Duffy's "Mercy" for its own "Dancing Queen," or when myriad K-pop groups followed the success of "Despacito" down the reggaeton rabbit hole — but also in its efforts to recreate the tactics of anything that brings in audiences (hence "the K-pop formula," which is about replicating the paces of idol assembly down to the members' roles). The space vacated by NewJeans has been tough to fill, but that doesn't mean there haven't been one-off attempts to take a few laps in its lane. In Illit, a HYBE sister group whom Min accused of ripping off NewJeans wholesale, you can hear the same collage-like principle on songs like "Magnetic" and "jellyous." Olivia Marsh, the literal sister of NewJeans' Danielle, tunes her "Strategy" to a similar turn-of-the-millenium frequency. Several songs, from ifeye's "IRL" and HITGS' "SOURPATCH" to VIVIZ's "Full Moon" and izna's "BEEP," have tried to recreate the bubblegum bass vibe of skipping rhythms and lush, light vocals; even TWICE got in on the fun last year. Others, like Hearts2Hearts' "Blue Moon" and RESCENE's "Deja Vu," conjure the dreamy, rosy-eyed R&B-lite. All of these attempts are serviceable; many are even pleasant. But none quite recreate the mojo.

    The contrast is, at least partly, in the roadmap. Min made an organizational practice of stockpiling good, complete songs and figuring out what to do with them later, whereas the traditional K-pop process involves building an elaborate concept around a plug-and-play single and treating it as a peg for months of extended rollout activities. NewJeans didn't do isolated campaigns or tossed-off B-sides; everything served the broader group architecture, something not to be taken for granted in K-pop's LARPing ecosystem, where artists transform between promo cycles. (Just look at the jarring transition from LE SSERAFIM's posed, subtle, disco-inflected "Hot" to the campy, lurid, rap-forward "Spaghetti.") Min once said that the music itself was the concept with NewJeans, and simple as that seems, it's a key part of the group's appeal: There was an identifiable and qualifiable NewJeans sound, one that was singular and exclusive. It was clear what a New Jeans song was, and — just as crucially — what it wasn't, to the point of feeling intuitive. The group did all of the things inherent to K-pop groups, but it did so with a sense of taste top of mind.

    The worst K-pop can feel like bad product placement: odious in its lack of subtlety, putting the commerce front and center and pretending otherwise, treating its "idols" like collectible dolls to generate shareholder value. It would be disingenuous to suggest that NewJeans was in any way immune to the genre's hazards of investment opportunity or marketing front — the video for "ETA" is an ad for the iPhone 14 Pro — but the group's promotion was far less gauche; it was purposeful, even, and shrewd in its movements. It was the influencer ideal: the mere presence doing much of the selling, of a vibe more than a commodity. There was a naturalness, at odds with the usual K-pop posturing, and the styling and choreography were in complete alignment with the music, which was clearly the main attraction. That is, perhaps, why this battle feels particularly distressing in an industry that is no stranger to scandal and corporate malpractice. It is disorienting for K-pop's most actualized act to become the face of its dysfunction.

    It's impossible to say whether this is the beginning of the end for NewJeans. Perhaps, years from now, Min Hee-jin's dismissal will feel like the official death knell — or maybe it will be a blip in an otherwise successful career at ADOR. But it's also tempting to think of the what-ifs — the artistic and workplace breakthroughs that could have been made at the key turning points of this saga. What might the NewJeans arc have been had it continued uninterrupted, and could it have ushered in a new K-pop paradigm, or at least an alternative to the norm? What might the business look like had the Environment and Labor Committee heard Hanni's testimony as an elegy, a plea to bury the old ways? Min once mused, "It can be scary to suggest something different. But once the suggestion is accepted, I think that's what writes new history." Before us now is the other side of that coin: the suggestion rejected, the door closed on renewal, and a group once defined by its counterculture ethos headed back to the assembly line, to resume performing as though nothing has changed. K-pop is reliant on a blissful suspension of disbelief, the stage as a whimsical little pocket world — but it's hard to imagine the many layers of strained relationships here won't taint the NewJeans fantasy in ways that cannot be ignored.

    In a recent interview with the Associated Press, SM Entertainment founder Lee Soo-man — Min's former boss and a key player in K-pop's global expansion — was asked his thoughts on the genre's darker controversies, from which his own company had scarcely been immune. (Recall TVXQ's "slave contract" controversy and Sulli's suicide — both SM artists.) Lee responded with another question: "Should we always weigh the dark side equally with the bright side, the future?" he asked. "Media should consider whether K-pop represents more future or more past that holds us back. Rather than just discussing the dark side and dragging us down by clinging to the past, shouldn't we talk more about the future?" I've been thinking about that a lot since I read it. It's a question premised on the idea that the past and future are partitioned from each other, and that the darkness is all in the rearview mirror. Yet if the NewJeans gauntlet is any indication, those tribulations are still far closer to us than they appear.