The Justice Department filed a lawsuit against California on Monday, arguing a state law limiting transfers of federal lands interferes with Congress’ right to control the sale of federal property. We also dive into how Spotify rocked the music industry as the streaming service goes public today; are the new Sinclair TV station promos warning against ‘false news’ ethical?; and more.
SCOTUS rules in favor of qualified immunity for police officer in excessive force case
The ongoing legal battle following a controversial police shooting of a woman has finally come to a close, with the majority of The Supreme Court ruling in favor of the officer due to a lack of precedent for the case.
Without any briefing or oral arguments, the justices overturned a previous ruling in the case of Kisela v. Hughes. The initial incident which sparked the lawsuit took place in 2010, when police corporal Andrew Kisela shot and wounded Amy Hughes, who had been holding a knife at the time of the shooting.
Hughes and her roommate stated that she had held the knife in a non-threatening manner at her side, and that Kisela’s decision to shoot qualified as excessive force. Though the previous appeals court ruled in Hughes’ favor, The Supreme Court stated Monday that because there was no constitutional precedent for which Kisela could reference at the time of the incident, he has qualified immunity from any legal persecution.
Guest:
Clark Neily, vice president for criminal justice at Cato Institute
Kent Scheidegger, legal director and general counsel at the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, a Sacramento organization dedicated to criminal justice policy issues
As Spotify goes public, we look at how the streaming service rocked the music industry
With little fanfare, Spotify is expected to go public today, Tuesday, on the New York Stock Exchange through the unusual move of a direct listing.
Spotify’s streaming music service has nearly 71 million paying customers, almost twice as much as its nearest competitor, Apple Music. Still, it’s unclear how going public will affect the company.
This latest news gives us a chance to step back and look at how Spotify has affected the music industry on a larger scale.
A few decades ago, some thought that MP3 encoding and then subsequent methods of pirating songs, for example though Napster, sounded the death knell for the music industry. But streaming has changed the game, though there are still questions about whether services like Spotify benefit artists, labels and consumers.
If you are a musician or work in the music industry, we want to hear from you. How has Spotify changed the landscape?
Guest:
Steve Knopper, music journalist and contributing editor for Rolling Stone; author of “Appetite for Self-Destruction: The Spectacular Crash of the Record Industry in the Digital Age” (2009, Simon & Schuster), which was updated in 2017 with a chapter on Spotify; he tweets
From latchkey kids to helicopter parents: Utah’s new ‘free-range parenting law’ highlights generational shift in how we supervise kids
In what is believed to be a first-of-its-kinds law in the U.S., Utah’s governor has signed a law that allows parents to let their children play alone in a park or walk home alone from school without fear of being prosecuted for neglect.
The so-called “free-range parenting” bill removes activities from the Utah’s definition of child neglect that, according to the bill, children can reasonably do without supervision, so long as the child’s “basic needs are met and [they] are of sufficient age and maturity to avoid harm or unreasonable risk of harm.” So, under the new law child services can no longer remove children from their parents if, for example, they are found walking or biking to or from school alone, playing alone outside, or traveling alone to recreational or commercial facilities.
The “free-range parenting” movement centers around the idea that kids should be allowed to do certain things on their own without suffocating oversight from mom and dad. It was coined by former New York Daily News columnist Lenore Skenazy, who wrote a story for the New York Sun in 2008 about how she, at her 9-year-old son’s request, left him alone in a New York City department store with a MetroCard, $20, some quarters for a payphone call (just in case) and the task of finding his own way home. He returned safely, and with a new sense of independence. Skenazy’s story, of course, went viral. Some lauded Skenazy for trusting her son’s intelligence and decision-making skills enough to let him navigate his own way home. Others accused her of of poor parenting and wondered how any mother could simply leave her child to find his own way home.
The issue resurfaced nationally three years ago when a couple from Maryland were charged with child neglect for allowing their 6 and 10-year-old, walk home alone from a park. They were eventually cleared and their children returned to their custody, but it raised questions about how much leeway parents should be given to decide what activities are safe for their kids to do alone.
What’s your take on this legislation? Do you think more states should pass a law like it? What, if any, potential unintended consequences do you see? What do you think about the idea of “free-range parenting?” Do you consider yourself a “free-range parent?” Why or why not?
Guest:
Lenore Skenazy, founder of the “free-range kids” movement and president of nonprofit Let Grow, which advocates for “free-range” parenting
The Trump administration is suing California again, but this time it’s over federal land transfers
The Justice Department filed a lawsuit against California in Sacramento on Monday to block a state law that limits transfers of federal lands.
The suit alleges that California’s law violates the constitution because it interferes with Congress’ rights to control the sale of federal property and that it should be blocked.
California Legislature adopted the law at the urging of environmentalists concerned that the federal government may sell off federal land for real estate development, mining or drilling.
Guest:
Eric Biber, professor of law at UC Berkeley; he is the director of the school’s environmental and energy law programs
Debating the ethics of media company Sinclair’s new mandated promos warning viewers against ‘false news’
In March, Sinclair Broadcast Group TV stations started airing promos in which local anchors expressed concern about “the troubling trend of irresponsible, one sided news stories plaguing our country.”
The scripted, word-for-word promos were met with discontent by some of the anchors who were required to read them and created a social media whirlwind after websites like Deadspin and ThinkProgress mashed the promos together into one, eerie “journalistic responsibility message.”
How America's largest local TV owner turned its news anchors into soldiers in Trump's war on the media:
— Deadspin (@Deadspin)
How America's largest local TV owner turned its news anchors into soldiers in Trump's war on the media: https://t.co/iLVtKRQycL pic.twitter.com/dMdSGellH3
— Deadspin (@Deadspin) March 31, 2018
Critics have long argued Sinclair Broadcast Group uses its local stations to advance a right-leaning agenda. Since 2015, it has required its stations to air Sinclair-produced “must-run” packages that highlight a conservative perspective. One recent must-run segment explored the concept of a “deep state” of public authorities trying to undermine President Trump.
Sinclair is already the largest owner of television stations in the United States, owning or operating 193 stations across the country – and if the FCC approves its $3.9 billion bid to buy Tribune Media, that number would grow by 40 and give Sinclair stations in major markets like New York, Chicago and Los Angeles.
Larry sits down with two media ethics experts to discuss the promos and their role in the larger media landscape.
Guests:
Jane Kirtley, professor of media ethics and law at the School of Journalism and Mass Communication at the University of Minnesota
Jeffrey McCall, professor of communication at DePauw University in Indiana and former journalist; he is the author of “Viewer Discretion Advised: Taking Control of Mass Media Influences” (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2007); he tweets
Broadway giants: How Rodgers and Hammerstein transformed musical theater
Almost 75 years ago, composer Richard Rodgers and librettist Oscar Hammerstein II opened their first Broadway co-production, Oklahoma!
The two had written dozens of musicals on their own before the 1943 production, but went on to win critical acclaim and a special Pulitzer Prize arts award after joining forces, followed by creating a string of golden age musicals including Carousel, South Pacific, The King and I and The Sound of Music.
In a new book by longtime journalist and writer Todd S. Purdum, Purdum details their inspiring partnership through a rare trove of letters, diaries, interviews and more.
Host Larry Mantle speaks to Purdum about the book and how the Rodgers-Hammerstein names will forever be remembered for building “Something Wonderful.”
Guest:
Todd S. Purdum, author of the book, “Something Wonderful: Rodgers and Hammerstein’s Broadway Revolution” (Henry Holt and Company, 2018); senior writer at POLITICO and contributing writer editor at Vanity Fair