Satellite data suggests Flight 370 went down in the southern Indian Ocean, according to Malaysia's Prime Minister. Ukraine is withdrawing troops from Crimea. Next, is an abortion rights group wrong to publish personal information about its opposition? Then, should California ban fishing techniques that cause collateral damage to marine life? Later, what should film productions do when a leading actor dies?
Satellite data suggests Malaysian Flight 370 went down in Indian Ocean
Two weeks after its initial disappearance, the fate of missing Malaysian flight 370 is now less of a mystery. Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak announced on Monday that the missing jetliner crashed into a remote area of the Indian Ocean.
This announcement comes after a new analysis of satellite data which indicates that the plane, carrying 239 people, flew “to a remote location, far from any possible landing sites.” The UK Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) has said it is working with Inmarstat, the British satellite company, to determine the search area for the airliner.
A spokesperson for the UK AAIB said, "As set out by the Malaysian PM today, we have been working with the UK company Inmarsat, using satellite data to determine the area on which to focus the search. We are not able to comment further on this investigation, which is being led by the Malaysian authorities."
Although the search area for the plane has narrowed, many questions remain in the wake of this new discovery. What actually happened on Flight 370? Can the missing plane be found? What does this mean for the future of airline security?
Guests:
Al Yurman, Retired Field Investigator for the National Transportation Safety Board
Simon Boxall, Ph.D., Oceanographer with Southampton University’s National Oceanography Centre
Dueling maps of abortion protesters, clinics raise privacy questions
The abortion-rights group, Voice of Choice, has come under fire for posting the names, home addresses, phone numbers and social media accounts of anti-abortion protestors to an online map on its website.
On the website of Maryland-based group, the protesters are labeled as “bullies,” and photos of each person complements the personal information.
Todd Stave, the founder of Voice of Choice, is a landlord at a women's health clinic in Germantown, Md. that performs late-term abortions. Stave says he decided to create the map after protesters showed up at his kids' school waving anti-abortion banners. Stave’s map is modeled after an anti-abortion website that lists doctors and clinics that perform abortions on the site AbortionDocs.org, run by the organization Operation Rescue.
In the latter case, no personal information is posted, just locations of clinics and doctor's offices. Still, protestors are known to protest at doctors’ homes.
Is Stave's decision to post personal information on his site a violation of privacy? Do the people on the site have a right to have their information taken down? People have the right to protest, but should they also expect privacy? Does "fighting fire with fire" hurt the abortion-rights movement?
Guests:
Todd Stave, entrepreneur and creator of VOChoice.org, the site which lists pro-life protestors.
Matt Yonke, Communication Director for Pro-Life Action League, also listed as a “bully” on the Voice of Choice map.
Ukraine withdraws troops from Crimea as Russia bolsters military presence at the border
Ukrainian troops have begun steady withdrawal from Crimea as Russian military forces seize bases and reinforce the border. Ukraine’s national security council made the decision to evacuate troops and their families.
Although Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Russia has no intent to move troops into Eastern Ukraine, global criticism about military movement in Crimea is strong. NATO’s top military commander has expressed concern about the forces on the Ukrainian border, and the U.S. and E.U. have expanded on sanctions against Russia.
Will sanctions and criticism be enough to keep Russia from expanding military occupation into Eastern Ukraine? How will Ukraine handle suggestions to create more independent regions within the country? How will military tension resolve in Crimea?
Guest:
Will Pomeranz, Deputy Director of the Kennan Institute at the Wilson Center
California fisheries called out in new report for staggering amount of 'by catch'
Hundreds of thousands of dolphins, whales, sharks, sea lions, turtles and fish are ensnared accidentally in fishing nets and tossed back into the ocean every year. Most of that 'by catch' - creatures that are caught up in fishing nets or lines - are killed as collateral damage of the commercial fishing industry.
A new report out by ocean conservation organization Oceana identifies nine of the 'dirties' fisheries in the US that toss out the most by catch. Two of those fisheries are in California, which still allows the controversial fishing technique of 'drift gillnets' in federal waters off the state. The gillnets are large nets primarily catch swordfish, common thresher, shortfin mako.
New legislation was sponsored recently to ban the already-limited practice because of threats to sea turtles, whales and other wildlife. California fisheries who use the technique say they already do everything they can to reduce the amount of by catch since it's not in their interest to toss out tons of seafood or ensnare large sea creatures in very expensive nets.
Why are 'gillnest' still used to catch swordfish? Do you pay attention to how the seafood you eat is caught? Should we ban the fishing technique if it's leading to so much by catch?
Guests:
Ben Enticknap, Pacific project manager and senior scientist at Oceana, an international ocean conservation organization, and co-author of Wasted Catch: Unsolved Problems in U.S. Fisheries
Tom Ross, independent swordfish fisherman on the Diane Susan vessel
Is it ethical to posthumously put an actor into a film?
When an actor or actress dies during the filming, production teams are often left at a crossroads. Can they continue on and adapt the film to fit with the footage they have? Will they have to scrap everything and start from scratch?
After the tragic deaths of actors Philip Seymour Hoffman and Paul Walker, rumors have started about how production of their films (The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Parts I and II and The Fast and the Furious 7, respectively) will proceed. Reports about both sets of productions have speculated that the films will use technology to fill in the gaps -- from CGI to voice recreation and body doubles.
In the past, directors have used different tactics to keep a deceased actor in a film, including editing, recasting, and digital recreation. Is using movie magic to bring an actor “back to life” onscreen ethical?
How is digital manipulation or editing in this kind of situation different from other tricks of “movie magic” -- we’re used to seeing stunt doubles, body doubles, and CGI in film, but is there a line drawn when it comes to death? How will production companies and actors deal with rights of publicity after death in the future?
Lionsgate and Universal declined to comment.
Guest:
Robert Thompson, Director, Bleier Center for Television & Popular Culture at Syracuse University