Today on AirTalk, we discuss the latest on measure EE’s defeat and examine what's next for LAUSD. We also explore a measure from San Francisco that would force some mentally ill drug addicts into treatment; discuss the role technology plays in content moderation and public safety; and more.
Voters Say No To Parcel Tax To Fund LAUSD
Los Angeles Unified School District leaders are going to need a new way to pay for the promises they made to end last January's teachers strike.
Election night results showed Measure EE, an LAUSD proposal for a new tax to generate operating revenues for the district's schools, falling short of the necessary two-thirds majority it needed to pass.
The outcome is a huge setback for the LAUSD officials and United Teachers Los Angeles who reached a deal to decrease class sizes and hire more staff for the sprawling school system despite, district officials said, not having the money to pay for all of it.
Because striking teachers wanted these changes — and because the teachers strike itself was
Interesting @LMUstudyLA survey finds 80 percent "somewhat-" or "strongly support" #UTLAStrike. Majority support for @UTLAnow members crosses racial and income lines, regardless of whether respondents had kids at home. #lausdstrike
— Kyle Stokes (@kystokes) January 15, 2019
Full report: https://t.co/4EVAwsJ0HV pic.twitter.com/SWD3zPUQ2t
— L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti urged the district to agree to the union's demands in hopes voters might be willing to pick up the bill. They were not.
We get the follow-up on Measure EE’s defeat, plus what’s next for LAUSD.
To read more on LAist, click here.
Guest:
Kyle Stokes, education reporter for KPCC who’s been following the story; he tweets
Down The Rabbit Hole: The Dark Side Of YouTube’s Automated Recommendation System
Earlier this week, an article from the New York Times outlined the “rabbit hole effect” of YouTube’s algorithms and pointed out how the platform may recommend videos of young children to viewers who had previously viewed sexually themed content.
Researchers attribute this to what some studies call a “rabbit hole effect” an online viewing trend that leads people on platforms like YouTube to incrementally watch more extreme topics or videos, which then hook viewers in. However, YouTube has stated that removing their automated recommendation system, which they say drive up to 70 percent of views by suggesting what users should watch next, altogether would only hurt its content creators who rely on the system.
Shortly after the New York Times article was published, YouTube released a statement on their official blog, outlining recent policy and algorithm updates that protect minors and families. Some of YouTube’s new policies included restricting live streaming features for younger minors unless they are clearly accompanied by an adult as well as limiting recommendations of content that features minors in risky situations.
Earlier this year, YouTube had also announced that it would turn off comments on nearly all videos featuring kids, following a similar controversy in February where pedophiles were leaving inappropriate comments on children’s videos.
Today on AirTalk, we’ll discuss the role technology and online platforms like YouTube play in content moderation and public safety with the co-director of the Center for Scholars & Storytellers as well as one of the researchers who ran an experiment on how YouTube’s algorithms direct its users.
Should parents be responsible for the content they're putting online of their children or does YouTube need to step in? What do you think? Give us a call at 866-893-5722.
Guests:
Jonas Kaiser, affiliate researcher at Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society; he is one of three researchers who conducted an experiment on how YouTube’s algorithms direct its users; he tweets
Sierra Filucci, editorial director at Common Sense Media, a media literacy nonprofit in San Francisco; one of her areas of expertise is educating parents on media and social media use
Suresh Venkatasubramanian, professor of computing at the University of Utah and a member of the board of directors for the ACLU Utah; he studies algorithmic fairness; he tweets
San Francisco To Force Some Mentally Ill Drug Addicts Into Treatment
San Francisco officials decided Tuesday to force some people with serious mental illness and drug addiction into treatment, even if it goes against the spirit of a city known for its fierce protection of civil rights.
Several members of the Board of Supervisors voiced deep concerns Tuesday about the possibility of taking away a person’s civil liberties, but the proposal for a pilot program passed 10-1.
Mayor London Breed and other supporters say the move — known as conservatorship — is necessary to help people who are often homeless, addicted to drugs and have a mental illness, making them a danger to themselves.
The measure would apply to a handful of people, the city’s department of public health estimated, although the number would grow under legislation pending at the state level.
Critics call the measure politically driven and a violation of civil rights that runs against the principles of the liberal city. They say it would lead to locking up people in facilities and that San Francisco lacks the resources to successfully expand the number of people in such a program.
With files from the Associated Press
Guests:
Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), California State Senator representing Senate District 11, which includes all of the city and county of San Francisco and parts of San Mateo County; he tweets
Eve Garrow, homelessness policy analyst and advocate at the ACLU
The California Supreme Court Takes Up The ‘Brady List’ Case
The California Supreme Court Wednesday hears oral arguments in what could be a landmark police transparency case: The justices are weighing whether the L.A. County Sheriff's Department can share the names of deputies who might have credibility problems with the District Attorney.
It all started three years ago, when former Sheriff Jim McDonnell tried to provide the DA with the names of 300 deputies found to have engaged in misconduct that might raise questions about their credibility when testifying in court.
The collection of names is called a Brady list, after the landmark 1963 U.S. Supreme Court case Brady v. Maryland, which established that prosecutors must turn over to the defense any evidence that might point to a defendant's innocence.
The Association of Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs sued to block McDonnell's move, arguing that turning over the list would violate California's Peace Officer Bill of Rights, which prohibits the release of any officer-related information unless a certain procedure is followed.
The procedure is the "Pitchess" process. It allows a judge to decide which information, if any, about an officer is released, and says officers' privacy must be protected.
McDonnell and the county held that Brady, which establishes "an affirmative constitutional duty" to share potentially exculpatory information, trumps Pitchess.
A state appeals court ruled in the union's favor in July 2017, ordering that the list remain secret. The county appealed to the state supreme court.
We check in with our criminal justice and public safety reporter Frank Stoltze on the latest from this morning’s oral argument.
To read more of this story on LAist, click here.
Guest:
Frank Stoltze, KPCC’s criminal justice and public safety correspondent