Double your impact on local news!

Support our 100% community funded newsroom on the first day of our fall member drive and your gift will be matched dollar for dollar.
Logged in as
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
  • Raises could create thousands of jobs
    Tall skyscrapers appear against a sky at dusk.
    Biltmore Los Angeles workers celebrate a tentative deal reached with the hotel to end their strike in October 2023.

    Topline:

    The Los Angeles City Council recently approved raising the city’s minimum wage for hotel and airport workers in time for the 2028 Olympics and Paralympics. L.A. hotel owners have already demonstrated they can handle a $30-an-hour wage — and much more.

    The details: The minimum wage for tourism workers — including hotel and airport employees — will rise to $30 an hour by 2028. The measure starts with an increase to $22.50 in July 2025 and includes additional health care stipends.

    Approved despite opposition: While critics argue that the raise will damage the city's budget and deter investment, David Roland-Host, a Berkeley-based economist hired by the city to study the wage proposal, estimated that L.A. hotels will accommodate the increase by raising their rates about 6%. Roland-Host said those pay raises will become “a tool for economic growth” and the ultimate creation of 6,000 full-time jobs by the Olympic year of 2028.

    This article was produced by Capital & Main. It is published here with permission.

    In the months preceding the Los Angeles City Council’s vote to gradually improve tourism industry workers’ wages to $30 an hour, the hotel and developer lobbies threw everything they had into pushing one apocalyptic message: Paying higher wages would prompt the businesses to retrench, downsize operations and abandon projects in and around the city.

    They brought the heat. The Hotel Association of Los Angeles warned the local Olympic organizing committee that it might not be able to honor contracts to furnish rooms for the 2028 L.A. Games. One property company said its investors would kill a planned expansion of a Hilton in Universal City if the higher wage kicked in. Another chief executive asserted that the city “has been crossed off the map by investors” in hotel projects.

    The councilmembers approved the measure anyway. And one reason they did may be that L.A. hotel owners have already demonstrated they can handle a $30-an-hour wage — and much more.
     

    The council’s action came less than a year after a prolonged series of rolling strikes by unionized Los Angeles hotel workers that resulted in new contract agreements with some 60 area hotels. (Disclosure: UNITE HERE Local 11, which led those strikes, is a financial supporter of Capital & Main.)

    Those 2024 agreements are illuminating, and there’s no doubt the members of the City Council have been taking notes. Under the union contracts, most room attendants will see their hourly wage reach $35 by July of 2027. Nontipped workers received wage increases of 40% to 50% over the four-and-a-half-year life of those deals, and the hotels agreed to return to pre-pandemic staffing levels and mandatory daily room cleanings.

    The new city ordinance initiates a series of annual raises beginning in July, when the workers’ minimum hourly pay will increase to $22.50. (The current hotel minimum wage in Los Angeles is $20.32.) They won’t hit the $30 mark until July of 2028. Airport and hotel workers will also receive $8.35 per hour to cover health care costs by July of next year.

    That’s a lot of numbers. Here is some context: According to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Living Wage Calculator, a single working adult in Los Angeles County with one child needs to earn $48.65 per hour just to cover basic living expenses. If two adults are working and have one child, each of those adults must earn nearly $27 an hour.

    “We want to be paid enough to live where we work,” Brenda Mendoza told me. Mendoza, a unionized worker at the JW Marriott L.A. Live hotel, is a Koreatown native; she and her family spent nearly a decade trying to afford life in the area before finally moving to San Bernardino County a couple of years ago. Mendoza, her husband and two sons make a nearly 200-mile round-trip commute daily to their jobs in Los Angeles.

    A crows of hotel workers gather behind a large banner with the words "Biltmore workers no more strike" as several in th ebackground raise their hands in celebration.
    The hotel workers strike affected hotels across the region, including in downtown L.A. at the Intercontinental — pictured here at right with the tall antenna.
    (
    Unite Here Local 11
    )

    No hourly wage increase is going to suddenly solve the affordable housing crisis in the L.A. area, but the city’s new ordinance is a massive development nonetheless. For airport workers like dishwashers and food caterers, the raises amount to a pay bump of 56% over three years, and it’s a 48% hike in the minimum wage for hotel workers.

    UNITE HERE and other pro-labor organizations pushed hard for the ordinance’s passage — but that’s not a new tactic. The groups have spent decades trying to change the labor landscape in and around Los Angeles, stumping for pro-union candidates for public office and helping to pass higher minimum wage requirements in Santa Monica, West Hollywood, Glendale and Long Beach.

    In almost every case, those efforts were met with dire warnings from industry leaders and lobbyists about the deleterious effects of raising minimum pay. Those same red flags were raised when the L.A. City Council passed a hotel minimum wage more than a decade ago.

    Hotel development and job creation, though, have only grown since then. More recently, the announcements that Los Angeles would host a spate of huge sporting events — the 2026 FIFA World Cup for soccer, the 2027 Super Bowl and the 2028 Olympics — have spurred a flurry of new hotel projects.

    That doesn’t mean every project will work, and it’s certainly possible that some investor groups will cite rising labor costs as a reason to avoid the L.A. hotel market and build elsewhere. Industry analyses, though, find that high interest rates and construction costs are the real challenges. In terms of the market itself, Marriott executive Javier Cano said, “There are always opportunities in L.A.”

    Not every company will be eager to jump on them. “The wage is too high. It will drive up costs significantly,” said Stuart Waldman, president of the Valley Industry & Commerce Association, which loudly opposed the City Council’s action. “This self-immolation will have dire consequences on the city’s budget for decades to come.”

    Or — it won’t. At a council meeting last December, a Berkeley-based economist hired by the city to study the wage proposal estimated that L.A. hotels will accommodate the increase by raising their rates about 6%. The economist, David Roland-Host, also told the council, “We don’t see any empirical evidence of massive layoffs in response to minimum wages anywhere in California.” His projection? Those pay raises will become “a tool for economic growth” and the ultimate creation of 6,000 full-time jobs by the Olympic year of 2028.

    Copyright 2025 Capital & Main

  • Fire began this afternoon and is threatening homes
    A screenshot from the Alert California camera system shows smoke rising from a canyon. Homes on hillsides are in the foreground; mountains in the background.
    Smoke rises from the Peak Fire on Thursday afternoon, not long after it started. This view is from the Chino Hills Alert California camera. The L.A. County Fire Department and firefighters from Angeles National Forest were among the first to respond.

    Topline:

    Evacuation orders and warnings have been issued near a brush fire north of San Gabriel Canyon Road in Azusa. The Peak Fire had burned about 22 acres since igniting on Thursday afternoon. Authorities warn that structures are threatened to the northeast of the fire.

    What we know so far: Firefighters from L.A. County and the Angeles National Forest were among the first to respond.

    Read on ... for more on evacuations and weather conditions.

    This is a developing story. For the most up-to-date information about the fire you can check:

    Evacuation orders and warnings have been issued near a brush fire north of San Gabriel Canyon Road in Azusa. The Peak Fire had burned about 22 acres since igniting on Thursday afternoon. Authorities warn that structures are threatened to the northeast of the fire.

    Southern California is under a red flag warning because of heat, low humidity and Santa Ana winds. Those conditions will continue through Saturday, according to National Weather Service forecasters.

    The basics

    • Acreage: 22 acres as of Thursday afternoon
    • Containment: 0%
    • Structures destroyed: None reported, but several are threatened.
    • Deaths: None
    • Injuries: None

      Evacuation map and orders

      Evacuation orders have been issued by the Azusa Police Department for the following areas:

      Evacuation warnings

      Authorities say those who require additional time to evacuate and those with pets and livestock should leave immediately. Details here.

      • AZU-ABC01
      • AZU-CYN01-A
      • AZU-NOB01
      • AZU-QRY01
      • LAC-E168-A
      • LAC-E168-B
      • LAC-E170-A
      • LAC-E170-B

      Listen to our Big Burn podcast

      Listen 39:42
      Get ready now. Listen to our The Big Burn podcast
      Jacob Margolis, LAist's science reporter, examines the new normal of big fires in California.

      Fire resources and tips

      Check out LAist's wildfire recovery guide

      If you have to evacuate:

      Navigating fire conditions:

      How to help yourself and others:

      How to start the recovery process:

      What to do for your kids:

      Prepare for the next disaster:

    • Sponsored message
    • First Ethics Commission meeting
      A dais with various people sitting behind desks with name tags that read "Edward Yen" and "Carmen Gutierrez" and above them a blond woman with glasses an a name tag in front of her computer reads "Kathryn Barger."
      Los Angeles County Supervisor Kathryn Barger.

      Topline:

      The newly created L.A. County Ethics Commission meets for the first time on Friday. Job one: decide how to fill the remaining commission seats and map out watchdog duties.

      Why it matters: Studies suggest the public has low trust in public agencies but thinks highly of ethics commissions as a way to promote good governance. 

      Why now: The creation of the ethics commission is the first of several groundbreaking reforms to L.A. County governance approved by voters in 2024 through Measure G.

      Read on… to find out how you can participate and hear about the work of the L.A. County Ethics Commission.

      The Los Angeles County Ethics Commission meeting on Friday is a milestone in a couple of ways.

      It’s the first time the largest county in the nation has had an independent watchdog commission to oversee campaign financing, lobbying, conflicts of interest and governmental ethics. The city of L.A. has had one since 1991.

      It’s also the first in a bundle of county reforms approved by voters through Measure G in 2024, which include expanding the Board of Supervisors from five to nine members, creating an elected county executive role and a legislative analyst position.

      Ethics commissions aren't that sexy.
      — Rob Quan, Unrig LA

      “Ethics commissions aren't that sexy,” said Rob Quan, an organizer with Unrig LA, a watchdog group focused on money and politics.

      But, he says, they’re crucial for making the relationship between money and elective offices transparent, which is often the root of political corruption.

      “It's really important to have these kinds of resources to be able to make connections, follow money, and hold people accountable,” he said.

      The commission will oversee matters within L.A. County government, which includes more than 115,000 positions and operates on a $54 billion budget.
      It's really important ... to be able to make connections, follow money, and hold people accountable.
      — Rob Quan, Unrig LA
      Many things are still to be decided including how it will carry out its work, how much staffing it will have, and the size of its budget.

      But Quan says having the first meeting is an important basic step, to establish “a centralized place where people can turn to, whether that's with a whistleblower [complaint] or just trying to get stuff changed,” he said.

      Make your voice heard

      The L.A. County Ethics Commission meets on Friday October 16 at noon.

      Attend virtually: bit.ly/Ethics-101626
      Attend in person: Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration, Room 374A, 500 W. Temple Street, Los Angeles

      A diverse makeup

      The Friday meeting underlines the extent to which the commission is in its infancy, as not all seven members of the commission have been appointed.

      So far three have been chosen, one each by the chair of the county Board of Supervisors, by the county assessor and by the Governance Reform Task Force, the body that’s guiding the implementation of Measure G. Members will serve staggered five-year terms. They include:

      • Wilma Franco, head of community development group Southeast Los Angeles Collaborative (SELA)
      • Amanda Susskind, former Anti-Defamation League Regional Director
      • Michael Woo, former L.A. City Councilmember

      The remaining four seats are still to be filled. They’ll be picked by those commissioners from a pool of members of the public who applied to be on the commission in July. That application window is now closed.

      It’s an important change, a nod to taking influence away from elected officials, who are often in the position of appointing people to oversee their own ethical compliance. For example, elected officials pick all five members of the city of L.A.’s Ethics Commission.

      The governance task force has forwarded 376 applications to the three commissioners. At Friday's meeting, they'll be discussing the best way to pick the remaining four members to ensure a wide range of backgrounds.

      Members of the public can weigh in with their views either in person or online. You can find the agenda here.

      Constraints

      Despite all these steps taken to create the new ethics oversight agency, some people have concerns.

      “I am doubtful that the ethics commission is going to have a lot of power," said Henrik Minassians, a professor in the department of urban studies and planning at California State University, Northridge. "The reason is because [of] the funding sources, and there are serious constraints with that.”

      Both those issues may be helped by the Nov. 3 election. Measure E on the L.A. County ballot would guarantee $14.3 million in annual funding for the commission, adjusted for inflation, and give the commission the power to compel officials to testify through subpoenas and issue fines of up to $15,000 per violation.

      A study out last month from the Rose Institute of State and Local Government said the reforms in Measure G are a “high-stakes experiment” whose success is far from guaranteed. But others say the reforms may bring a model of representative government that’s only been talked about so far.

    • Feds want to stop some mail-in vote counting
      Seal of the U.S. Department of Justice, showing a brown and white bald eagle holding an olive branch and arrows in front of a red-and-white striped shield, ringed by a navy band with gold lettering.
      Seal of the U.S. Department of Justice

      Topline:

      The Trump administration sued California election officials Thursday, asking a judge to bar the state from counting mail-in ballots for next month’s midterm elections from people the federal government has identified as “likely” noncitizens until their status can be confirmed.

      Why now: The lawsuit comes after the Justice Department said California officials failed to meet a 48-hour deadline to review a password-protected thumb drive that contains a list of 20,000 names the federal government believes are likely noncitizens who were sent ballots to participate in the Nov. 3 election. The state mails ballots to all registered voters. A top Justice Department official had sent a letter earlier this week threatening potential legal action if California didn’t comply.

      What's next: California Secretary of State Shirley Weber said in a letter to the Justice Department that the federal government hasn’t provided evidence to support its allegation that 20,000 names on the state’s voter rolls are of noncitizens. She referenced an instance in which the federal government alleged nearly 16,000 possible noncitizens were listed on Nevada’s voter rolls, but the state determined that all were, in fact, U.S. citizens. She also noted that voting is already underway in the state. Weber, a Democrat, said the Justice Department was “demanding unprecedented measures that threaten thousands of Californians’ right to vote, based on unverifiable information or methodology that you still fail to explain or provide.”

      The backstory: The Trump administration has made the hunt for noncitizen voters a priority this year, even though the problem is exceptionally rare. The Justice Department has charged about 90 people for various types of election misconduct so far this year, including 50 who are alleged to have voted as noncitizens. There were more than 227 million registered voters in the United States during the 2024 presidential election.

      The Trump administration sued California election officials Thursday, asking a judge to bar the state from counting mail-in ballots for next month’s midterm elections from people the federal government has identified as “likely” noncitizens until their status can be confirmed.

      The lawsuit comes after the Justice Department said California officials failed to meet a 48-hour deadline to review a password-protected thumb drive that contains a list of 20,000 names the federal government believes are likely noncitizens who were sent ballots to participate in the Nov. 3 election. The state mails ballots to all registered voters. A top Justice Department official had sent a letter earlier this week threatening potential legal action if California didn’t comply.

      California Secretary of State Shirley Weber said in a letter to the Justice Department that the federal government hasn’t provided evidence to support its allegation that 20,000 names on the state’s voter rolls are of noncitizens. She referenced an instance in which the federal government alleged nearly 16,000 possible noncitizens were listed on Nevada’s voter rolls, but the state determined that all were, in fact, U.S. citizens.

      She also noted that voting is already underway in the state. Weber, a Democrat, said the Justice Department was “demanding unprecedented measures that threaten thousands of Californians’ right to vote, based on unverifiable information or methodology that you still fail to explain or provide.”

      California’s elections are in “full compliance” with federal law, she added.

      Los Angeles County Registrar Dean Logan said in a statement that his office received the letter and thumb drive this week, along with a “hand written note providing a password” to access the list of alleged noncitizens on the voter rolls. He said he did not consider the thumb drive a secure device. The secretary of state’s office said the password was written “on a sticky note.”

      The Justice Department’s lawsuit says the federal government sought to “work collaboratively” with California to identify noncitizens registered to vote in the state, and “California made no serious effort to do so.”

      “The United States thus seeks commonplace election relief when a ballot is called into question,” the lawsuit says. “This Court should enjoin California from presently tabulating vote by-mail ballots from likely noncitizens in the upcoming federal election until the voter’s citizenship status can be determined,” the lawsuit says.

      Weber, who is named in the lawsuit, suggested the federal government’s outreach had not been collaborative.

      She said that over the summer, the Department of Homeland Security claimed that California had 190,000 noncitizens on its voter rolls but refused to provide the methodology or data sources when the office asked for them.

      In her letter Thursday, she called the recent demands “an emergency of the DOJ’s creation.”

      The letter sent by acting Deputy Attorney General Trent McCotter gave the state 48 hours to research the list of the 20,000 people it claims might not be citizens. For those whose citizenship cannot be independently verified, the state is to instruct local election officials to segregate their mail-in ballots until their status can be determined, and to not provide a ballot to anyone who has not yet received one.

      California Attorney General Rob Bonta said at an unrelated press conference Thursday morning that state officials would not carry out the federal government’s requests to withhold ballots for the alleged noncitizen voters. He noted that the administration’s alleged number of noncitizens on the state’s voter rolls had dropped from the 190,000 flagged over the summer by the Department of Homeland Security to the 20,000 noted by the Justice Department.

      “What happened to those 170,000? They just got those wrong,” Bonta said.

      Bonta also said the Trump administration was violating a federal law that prohibits states from changing voter rolls within 90 days of an election.

      “They are in unprecedented, baseless, lawless territory,” he said.

      The Trump administration has made the hunt for noncitizen voters a priority this year, even though the problem is exceptionally rare. The Justice Department has charged about 90 people for various types of election misconduct so far this year, including 50 who are alleged to have voted as noncitizens. There were more than 227 million registered voters in the United States during the 2024 presidential election.

    • 24 taxpayer-funded employees are on his team
      Gavin Newsom, a man with a light skin tone, wears a dark navy blazer and a white open-collared shirt. He smiles and speaks, looking off to the side against a soft blue-gray sky.
      California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks during a Clean California event in San Francisco on Nov. 9, 2023.

      Topline:

      The past two decades of media contraction have allowed government officials in every town to talk less to traditional news outlets. Instead, they talk directly with voters and constituents on their own platforms. Gov. Gavin Newsom is one of them.

      Why it matters: Newsom has exploited the trend with unique energy, and is now preparing to leave office after eight years as governor as one of the Democratic Party’s most prolific communicators. The potential 2028 presidential contender has been a Twitch stream guest, a Substacker and a podcast bro. He never stops posting. He picks fights, on X especially, with right-wing media, an industry he is both critical of and fascinated with.

      The backstory: Newsom has 24 taxpayer-funded employees on his official communications team who are collectively paid at least $2.6 million a year, including staff who scout locations for events and camera operators who livestream them. That’s up from 12 in January 2020, a year into his first term. The only other governor with a comparable communications staff was Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, an international media sensation whose office credentialed 400 reporters in his first term and held weekly press briefings, said former spokesperson Margita Thompson. Today during one of Newsom’s rare Sacramento press conferences, between 10 and 20 reporters regularly attend. The office stopped issuing its own press credentials years ago. Newsom’s office payroll includes several spokespeople, writers and researchers who explain state policy. It also has a four-person team of Tiktok- and pop-culture-savvy Gen Z digital staff who churn out a drumbeat of social media content on official accounts.

      Last month, while signing a bill to provide a tax credit for struggling local news outlets, Gov. Gavin Newsom reminisced about the days when reporters thronged around him when he was mayor of San Francisco — right around the time tech platforms swept into town and permanently disrupted the media industry.

      “There’s not a lot of you,” he said to the assembled Capitol press corps, with whom he said he had enjoyed an “awkwardly healthy” relationship over two terms as governor. “There’s not enough.”

      Left unsaid was how much he’s taken advantage of the industry’s transformation in his own political rise.

      The past two decades of media contraction have allowed government officials in every town to talk less to traditional news outlets. Instead they talk directly with voters and constituents on their own platforms.

      That allows them to dodge tough questions and independent media coverage where they’re “not controlling the narrative,” said Menlo College political science professor Melissa Michelson. Politicians have sought this for decades, Michelson said, but only in recent years — when over half of U.S. adults get news through social media — have they seen it as more important than traditional media.

      Newsom has exploited the trend with unique energy, and is now preparing to leave office after eight years as governor as one of the Democratic Party’s most prolific communicators.

      The potential 2028 presidential contender has been a Twitch stream guest, a Substacker and a podcast bro. He never stops posting. He picks fights, on X especially, with right-wing media, an industry he is both critical of and fascinated with.

      Some of his communications are done on campaign accounts, but much of the jousting comes from his taxpayer-funded governor’s office communications staff, who have played a major role in casting Newsom as the leading Democrat pushing back against the Trump administration in areas well beyond the boundaries of state policy.

      During his second term, the post-pandemic, post-recall election Newsom has grown his press and communications team into an around-the-clock, content-creating media operation, even as he rarely takes questions from the media in Sacramento and his agencies shun interview requests. He nearly doubled his communications staff since the pandemic, even adding a full-time photographer, making $212,000 a year, whose LinkedIn profile describes his job as focusing on the office’s “visual messaging, public perception and narrative development.”

      Doing it all

      Newsom has 24 taxpayer-funded employees on his official communications team who are collectively paid at least $2.6 million a year, including staff who scout locations for events and camera operators who livestream them. That’s up from 12 in January 2020, a year into his first term.

      The only other governor with a comparable communications staff was Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, an international media sensation whose office credentialed 400 reporters in his first term and held weekly press briefings, said former spokesperson Margita Thompson. Today during one of Newsom’s rare Sacramento press conferences, between 10 and 20 reporters regularly attend. The office stopped issuing its own press credentials years ago.

      Newsom’s office payroll includes several spokespeople, writers and researchers who explain state policy. It also has a four-person team of Tiktok- and pop-culture-savvy Gen Z digital staff who churn out a drumbeat of social media content on official accounts.

      The size of Newsom’s communications operation reflects his “do it all” style of governing.

      He won office with a long list of lofty priorities from expanding healthcare and universal preschool to fighting climate change, and created new state departments for issues previously left to other governments, like a homelessness agency and a state surgeon general’s office. He has expanded the size of the state government to an all-time high.

      Newsom treats publicity as part of that public policy strategy, said Erin Mellon, a director of communications for Newsom from 2020 to 2024.

      “If you’re not actually telling people about what you’re doing, then doing it doesn’t make a difference because they can’t take advantage of that” policy or program, Mellon said of Newsom’s thinking. “When someone had a problem with the state of California, even if it was a local issue, it reflected on him, on his role and his job as governor. He would insert himself.”

      Her team had the inside joke “Everything is a comms problem” printed on mugs, Mellon said.

      It’s a stark contrast from the lean, budget-cutting days of his Democratic predecessor Gov. Jerry Brown, who presided over the state’s recovery from the Great Recession. Brown, gruff and unpolished, ran a famously small press shop and often eschewed weighing in on issues. The office had eight staffers at its height — including interns — and borrowed photographers from other agencies.

      “He was like, ‘I don’t have to have an opinion on everything that happens and I don’t want to,’” recalled a former spokesperson, Elizabeth Ashford. “I don’t think he was that interested in new media. Newsom is.”

      Bob Salladay, a former journalist and Newsom’s senior adviser for communications, said most of his staff’s time is still spent responding to traditional media inquiries and explaining state policy to national reporters and a hollowed-out state press corps. The growth of the communications staff, he said, is “responding to the volume of work that the governor is doing.”

      “You cannot overstate the difference between this governor and past governors in terms of what they’re involved in doing,” said Salladay, who makes $242,000 a year. “That generates a huge amount of inquiries into the office.”

      The team also takes significant liberties beyond policy communications.

      The digital staff’s output includes fan edits of Newsom set to Nicki Minaj and an X post of a pixelated image implying something tawdry about Trump’s chin flesh that got 30 million views. Newsom’s official accounts used a slew of memes and mockery last summer as they promoted both California’s resistance to Trump’s National Guard deployment in LA and Newsom’s anti-GOP gerrymandering initiative. His press office’s X account gained half a million followers last August alone, Newsom’s office said.

      There is also more overt overlap with the political side of Newsom’s operation. Izzy Gardon, the spokesperson behind much of Newsom’s more combative public image, has accompanied the governor on his political travels to red and swing states ahead of a likely 2028 presidential run. This summer, Salladay said Gardon moved into a part-time role with the office, now making half his $185,000-a-year state salary and doing political work for Newsom during his unpaid time. Other staff take personal time to volunteer for Newsom’s campaign, he said.

      ‘If we were Trumpian’

      The relentless drumbeat of snarky posts from the governor’s official press office and Newsom’s foray into podcasting and other media known to be frequented by young men online have gotten him plenty of attention ahead of his anticipated decision.

      Celinda Lake, a Democratic strategist and pollster who has worked with other politicians considering 2028 runs, said Newsom stands out in the party for his unique comfort communicating on platforms that tend to be dominated by younger, insurgent progressives or conservatives. She called his digital operation “very effective” and “one of the best out there.”

      “He has mastered being able to set the agenda and being able to get other people to respond to him,” she said.

      The strategies are not without criticism. Rob Stutzman, a Republican strategist who was once a spokesperson for Schwarzenegger, said Newsom has blurred ethical lines by using his office “to basically run a political account” in ways that mirror how the president treats his political opponents and the press.

      Newsom’s office tells conservative writers they are not “real journalists.” The social media posts range from routine policy announcements to AI-generated memes boosting Newsom and sexualized taunts at Republicans. The account frequently engages in fights with the right, scorning them for their alignment with Trump, who is widely unpopular in California. In a recent flurry of posts, Newsom’s office called for California’s GOP congressmembers to condemn Trump’s declaration to “let [Iran] take out Los Angeles or San Diego.” When Republican-turned-independent Kevin Kiley responded that he criticized the comment, Newsom’s office wrote it was insufficient and replied, “You’re a weak little noodle.”

      “Trump has changed the norms,” Stutzman said. “And Newsom, his operation basically adopted the Trump playbook.”

      But for every alleged offense, Newsom’s team points to a bigger one from the president, like his recent taxpayer-paid pro-Trump political ads. Newsom himself has attested to satirizing Trump’s rhetoric to call attention to the president’s many disputes with California, like his withholding of federal aid in the wake of the January 2025 Los Angeles wildfires.

      “These last two years with Trump are different than any other moment in modern American history, so you have to deal with it in different ways,” Salladay said. He added later, “If we were Trumpian, we would have cut off the California Post by now. But we work with them every day,” referring to the Rupert Murdoch-owned offshoot of the New York Post that started publishing in January.

      Countering the right

      Two full-time staff members are assigned to “rapid response,” which involves fact-checking claims and misinformation about Newsom, his policies and his governance of California on four social media platforms, as well as pushing traditional media outlets to change things they deem incorrect.

      The office boasts of requesting 453 corrections since 2024. Salladay said the rapid response operation grew out of narratives on right-wing media and social media about the Los Angeles fires, crime and the state’s business climate.

      He denied that the effort amounts to using state funds to burnish Newsom’s political image. Misinformed notions of California, he said, could result in policy decisions that affect constituents, like the federal government withholding aid.

      “When people tell you San Francisco is a hellhole or California is driving out businesses, that’s the propaganda we have to counter,” he said. “That is a state operation. We are defending the state and we have a right to do that, because the narrative can be incredibly damaging.”

      In 2025, the Public Policy Institute of California found the number of business headquarters leaving California annually increased between 2011 and 2021, but found their share of all business activity was small, as was the overall effect on jobs.

      But even as Newsom’s subordinates argue with and dismiss right-wing media outlets online, he maintains a fascination and friendliness with many of them. In 2025, in the wake of bruising election losses for the Democratic Party and young men tilting rightward hard, he shocked fellow liberals by launching a podcast, “This is Gavin Newsom,” featuring a string of conservative activists and media figures as guests.

      Pitched as a way to have friendly debate with his ideological opposites and to learn from right-wing communications successes, he launched the show with Charlie Kirk. The conservative activist put Newsom in a defensive position with a string of questionable claims about California schools, asserting their libraries contained pornography and that they were teaching “against white people.” On the show, Newsom also agreed with Kirk that it’s unfair for trans girls to play girls’ sports, and laughingly helped Kirk analyze how a 2024 campaign ad about Vice President Kamala Harris’ support for gender reassignment surgery for prisoners was bad optics for Democrats.

      It got Newsom a lot of attention and turned some heads on the right. Thompson, the former Schwarzenegger spokesperson, said she was alerted to the podcast a few months later by a conservative friend, who was surprised that in an episode with the conservative podcast host Shawn Ryan, Newsom talked of hunting and accepted a gift gun. (Earlier this year Newsom, in a financial disclosure, revealed he never took possession of the gun and his office would not say whether it’s in California.)

      “I liked that he’s going places where he is unexpected,” Thompson said, though she was turned off by the “bro talk.”

      Since then, the podcast, which is produced by iHeartRadio and for which Newsom is not paid, has taken a more expected liberal turn. Newsom has used it to promote Democrats, push last year for his successful gerrymandering initiative Prop. 50 and to discuss AI policy. But every few episodes, he returns to figures from the right, most recently Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy.

      Newsom spokesperson Anthony York said Newsom picks most of the guests from his personal contact list, calling the show “a reflection of who he is and his interests.”

      Newsom said last month that he hopes to keep the podcast going after he leaves office in January.

      Lake, the national strategist, said Newsom will have no trouble maintaining public attention.

      “The race starts Jan. 1, 2027,” she said. “He’s set up the infrastructure to keep it going.”

      This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.