The capture of the last known fugitive from the Paris attacks has been wounded and captured; discussing what it means for researchers to publish studies directly online and TGI-FilmWeek with Gavin Hood, director of "Eye in the Sky."
Paris terrorist attack fugitive captured in Belgium raid
The last known surviving fugitive from the Paris attacks that killed 130 has reportedly been captured.
Salah Abdeslam was the most wanted man in Europe. Authorities say he was wounded in the course of being arrested in Brussels. Abdeslam had been sought for the four months since the multiple attacks on a concert hall, restaurants, and cafes.
Guests:
William Braniff, Executive Director, National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism at the University of Maryland
Colin P. Clarke, Associate Political Scientist at Rand Corporation whose research focuses on counterinsurgency and counterintelligence (currently in Munich)
Airline, consumer travel industry experts on impact of several consumer-oriented proposals in Congress
Air travelers have been vocal about about shrinking seat sizes and rising surcharges on commercial airlines, especially over the last decade, and now it seems that lawmakers on Capitol Hill are trying to take action to give passengers more room and prevent surprise fees.
The Senate FAA Reauthorization Bill is just one of these pieces of legislation. In it, there are a number of flyer-friendly provisions, like automatic fee refunds and better fee disclosure.
There are also other bills like the Forbid Airlines From Imposing Ridiculous Fees Act of 2016 which would bar fees that are considered “not reasonable and proportional” to costs the airlines incur. and the Seat Egress in Air Travel Act, which would set a minimum seat size and space between rows.
Airline industry groups argue that the Senate FAA bill imposes too many regulations on air carriers and that if Congress truly wants to improve people’s flying experience, it will take up air traffic control reform.
Guests:
Charlie Leocha, chairman and co-founder of the consumer travel group Travelers United
Sharon Pinkerton, senior vice president of legislative and regulatory affairs for the airline trade group Airlines For America, whose members include Southwest Airlines, JetBlue, and American Airlines
Scientists consider whether sharing research results before peer review helps or hurts
Hashtag activism has hit the world of biology.
A growing number of biologists are using the hashtag #ASAPbio to promote "preprinting." That's the somewhat controversial practice of posting research results before they're published in peer review journals.
Journals like "Science," "Nature," and "Cell" have long been the gatekeepers between researchers, their peers, and the public. But the often lengthy review periods and rigid publishing standards can keep new data out of public view. That, some say, can put younger scientists at a disadvantage.
Several biologists — some Nobel Laureates among them — have taken to publishing papers on their latest findings on a public access website called bioRxiv prior to publication in established journals, once considered taboo among scientists.
Launched in 2013, the creators of bioRxiv intended their website to be a place biologists could follow the lead of physicists, who for years had been sharing their raw data online for free before seeking publication in a peer review journal.
“I’ve been concerned over the past several years that there’s been really some systemic flaws in the biomedical research enterprise," Johns Hopkins biology professor Carol Greider told KPCC.
Grieder, the recipient of the 2009 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, said the practice of withholding data can have an impact on the field's newest practitioners.
"It’s been very difficult for young people to get grants and to publish papers and the current system, the way it’s orchestrated really is leading to a number of young scientists just not going into the field, so we’ve been losing our best and our brightest.”
Last month Greider, other biologists, funders and representatives from various journals gathered in Chevy Chase, Maryland, to attend an event also called ASAPbio to weigh the impact of preprints on the field.
According to ASAPbio organizers, a consensus emerged at the meeting that preprints were beneficial for both “the public good as well as the individual scientist.”
“...A number of these journals, which have such a high reputation aren’t necessarily representing fair and across the board what is really the best science," Greider said.
"There are always, any time you have an elite class, people who know how to get into that elite class, and so it’s really is keeping down people who are trying to start out in the business by having such elitism, and by going to preprints where one can put the work out there and get comments on it and then later on publish it in a scientific journal for extensive peer review.”
But some critics of the preprint efforts worry that putting non-vetted data in the hands of the public could have serious consequences.
“My concerns really are for clinical research — so research that’s closer to the bedside than to the bench — because once research gets out there, whether it’s on a preprint server or in a journal, it’s out there," said Christine Laine, editor in chief of the journal “Annals of Internal Medicine.’ "And if it’s the sort of research that doctors and patients are going to make clinical decisions on, I really think that there could be some risk in having non-vetted work out there.”
Laine agreed that journals are not perfect and sometimes publish research that is later proven incorrect. Still, she still believes that the length of time required to vet scientific research adds value to the studies.
“The formal review process at the journals is part of the scientific process," she said. "And where a piece of work gets published really does signify to the people who are reading that work something about the quality.”
Guests:
Carol Greider, Professor of Molecular Biology at Johns Hopkins University and Nobel Laureate
Christine Laine, MD, Editor in Chief of Annals of Internal Medicine and Senior Vice President of the American College of Physicians
FilmWeek: ‘Divergent Series: Allegiant,’ ‘The Bronze,’ ‘Midnight Special’ and more
Larry Mantle and KPCC film critics Christy Lemire and Amy Nicholson review this week’s new movie releases including the latest in the Divergent series starring Shailene Woodley; a Sundance hit called “The Bronze;” a sci-fi adventure with star power called “Midnight Special;” and more.
TGI-Filmweek!
Christy's Hits:
Amy's Hits:
This week's misses:
Guests:
Amy Nicholson, Film Critic for KPCC and Chief Film Critic, MTV News; she tweets from
Christy Lemire, Film Critic for KPCC and Host of YouTube’s “What the Flick?” She tweets from
‘Eye in the Sky’ director tests morality of drone-warfare and ‘collateral damage’
Expanding in wider release this weekend, the film "Eye in the Sky" stars Helen Mirren as Colonel Katherine Powell, a UK-based military officer in command of a top secret drone operation to capture terrorists in Kenya.
Through remote surveillance and on-the-ground intel, Powell discovers the targets are planning a suicide bombing and the mission escalates from “capture” to “kill.” But as American drone pilot Steve Watts (Aaron Paul) is about to engage, a nine-year old girl enters the kill zone, triggering an international dispute reaching the highest levels of US and British government over the moral, political, and personal implications of modern warfare.
Other stars in the film include Alan Rickman, Barkhad Abdi, Jeremy Northam, Iain Glen and Phoebe Fox, the film is directed by Gavin Hood ("Tsotsi") and written by Guy Hibbert (“Prime Suspect”).
Guest:
Gavin Hood, Director, “Eye in the Sky;” Hood’s other directing credits include the Oscar-winner “Tsotsi;” “Ender’s Game,” “X-Men Origins: Wolverine”