Today on AirTalk, we discuss the latest on the college admissions scandal including the $6.5 million a Chinese family paid for their child to get into Stanford. We also examine the factors behind California's decline in population growth; and more.
Latest on the admissions scandal: More indictments expected, plus the $6.5 million a Chinese family paid for a spot at Stanford
It hasn’t even been two months since federal prosecutors charged 50 people in the largest college admission scandal ever prosecuted by the Department of Justice – but a lot has happened.
Yesterday, the Los Angeles Times identified the Chinese student whose family paid a $6.5 million bribe to ensure admission to Stanford. Yusi Zhao, who also goes by Molly, was admitted to Stanford in 2017 after the scam’s ringleader, William “Rick” Singer, billed her as a competitive sailor. No one from Zhao’s family has been charged so far. Stanford’s former sailing coach, however, pleaded guilty to racketeering in connection with the scandal back in March.
Meanwhile, the parents charged are developing their legal strategies. While 19 parents are pleading not guilty, 14 parents have said they will plead guilty and cooperate with the investigation – which, combined with the cooperation of Singer and others who helped facilitate the scam, could lead to more indictments.
Larry sits down with two reporters who have been covering the story to hear the latest on the scandal.
Guests:
Joel Rubin, reporter covering federal courts and agencies for the Los Angeles Times, who was one of the reporters that broke the story on the Chinese family behind the $6.5 million bribe for Stanford admission; he tweets
Melissa Korn, reporter covering higher education for the Wall Street Journal, who was one of the reporters that broke the story on Chinese family behind the $1.2 million bribe for Yale admission; she tweets
How much is too much? Court rules that intersex runner Caster Semanya must take hormone-supression drugs to compete as a woman
The sports world's highest court ruled Wednesday that Olympic gold medalist Caster Semenya and other female runners like her with unusually high testosterone must take medication to reduce their levels of the male sex hormone if they want to compete in certain events - a landmark decision with far-reaching ramifications for other women's sports.
In a 2-1 ruling, the Court of Arbitration for Sport upheld proposed rules issued by track's governing body, the IAAF, saying that they are discriminatory but that "such discrimination is a necessary, reasonable and proportionate means" of "preserving the integrity of female athletics."
The IAAF argued that high, naturally occurring levels of testosterone in athletes like Semenya with "intersex" characteristics that don't conform to standard definitions of male and female give them an unfair competitive advantage, and it decreed a maximum level for females.
The court decision could open the way for similar rules in other women's sports where size, speed and power make a difference, such as weightlifting, boxing, swimming, rugby, field hockey and soccer.
The decision means that Semenya, the two-time Olympic champion in the 800 meters, will have to lower her testosterone levels by such means as birth control pills or prostate cancer drugs if she wants to defend her world title in September in Doha, Qatar. Semenya is expected to race in the 800 on Friday at a track meet in Doha in what will be the last world-class event before the new rules apply.
Should Semenya have to take drugs to lower her testosterone? How should sports approach athletes that don’t neatly fit into the binary gender categories?
With files from Associated Press
Guests:
Madeleine Pape, a former Olympian from Australia who has raced against Semenya in 2009; she just published an op-ed in the Guardian on the IAAF’s decision; current Ph.D. candidate in sociology at the University of Wisconsinari
Rick Maese, sports reporter at the Washington Post
Back to the future: TV shows that withstand the test of time
With millions of Netflix subscribers and hundreds of shows to choose from, 8 out of 10 most-watched shows last year were reruns.
That’s according to a breakdown of Netflix’s viewership by data compiled for the Wall Street Journal by Nielsen. The same data found that viewers spent 45.8 billion minutes watching “The Office” over a 12-month span. And last year, the show alone accounted for nearly 3 percent of Netflix’s U.S. viewership. The other most-watched series included “Friends”-- a sitcom, WSJ reports, that cost Netflix $100 million to keep in 2019.
Despite “The Office” debuting 14 years ago and “Friends” piloting in 1994, both of the shows remain relevant to this day. Even Gen Z is obsessed with the sitcoms. So what makes a show about a paper company in Scranton, PA and a series about young Manhattanites appealing? What about the show makes it relatable to viewers across generations? And are there any other series that withstand the test of time? Have you discovered any “vintage” TV shows? And if so, how did you find them? We’re taking your calls at 866-893-5722.
Guest:
Lorraine Ali, television critic of the Los Angeles Times; she tweets
The Golden State’s population growth rate is the slowest in recorded history. Why?
California, the most populous state in the country, had its slowest recorded growth rate in its history last year.
Estimates released Wednesday show California had 39.9 million people as of Jan. 1, adding nearly 187,000 people for a growth rate of 0.47% — the lowest since 1900, the earliest records available. State officials said they expected the state’s birth rate to decline, but they were surprised by how much: More than 18,000 fewer births than the previous year. And while thousands lost their homes after last year’s deadly wildfire in the northern part of the state, initial estimates show most people shuffled to cities closest to the blaze.
Despite the slowdown, California remains by far the country’s most populous state. Texas at No. 2 is still shy of 30 million people. The new population estimates come as the state is preparing for the 2020 national census, an important headcount used to distribute federal tax dollars and decide congressional representation.
So what might be possible factors behind the decline? We check in with demographers to explain the numbers.
With files from the Associated Press.
Guests:
Dowell Myers, demography professor at USC; director of Population Dynamics Research Group at USC; he tweets
Randall Kuhn, demographer and associate professor of community health sciences at UCLA
GATE or gatekeeper? The argument that academic tracking creates racial segregation in schools
With the recent college admissions scandal and spotlight on underrepresentation of black students in New York’s specialized public high schools, questions about equity in education have been in the air.
In her recent Atlantic piece “The Other Segregation,” UC Merced sociology professor Whitney Pirtle argues that we should be paying attention to another form educational inequity: academic tracking.
Each school district typically has its own gifted and talented education (GATE) programs. The pathway to GATE differs depending on the district, but typically teachers tap student who they think might be gifted to take a test -- if they pass, they are separated out from the rest of the school and put on a different academic track with more challenging teachers and accelerated curriculum and activities. But who does a teacher deem “gifted” and how might their biases play into that decision? Whose parents have the knowledge or resources to push their kids towards GATE? According to Professor Pirtle, GATE programs have created schools within schools, where education is separate and unequal, and where black children don’t have access to the same opportunities. She cites research from the Center for American Progress, which found that while black students make up 17 percent of the population, they make up less than 10 percent of GATE students, as well as her personal experience as a parent.
We take a closer look at the pros and cons of academic tracking, as well as what might be done to address the racial disparities within GATE.
If you were a student or the parent of a student in a GATE program, what was your experience? Or if you were outside of the GATE programs, how do you feel it affected your education? What issues of privilege or inequity did you encounter?
Guests:
Whitney Pirtle, assistant professor of sociology at the University of California Merced; she is the author of the recent Atlantic piece “The Other Segregation”
Sandra Kaplan, professor of clinical education at USC and chair of the Education Committee for the California Association for the Gifted; she was also the president of the California Association for the Gifted and the National Association for Gifted Children
Lucy Hunt, an LAUSD district coordinator of Gifted/Talented Programs