KQED NEWSROOM: Cellphone Searches, S.F. Mayor Ed Lee and Brian Copeland’s “Not a Genuine Black Man”


>>>NEXT ON KQED “NEWSROOM”:   SHOULD POLICE BE ABLE TO EXAMEN   THE CONTENTS OF CELL PHONES   WITHOUT A WARRANT?   A LOOK AT THE CHANGING FACE OF   SAN FRANCISCO WITH MAYOR ED LEE.   PLUS, COMEDIAN BRIAN COPELAND   BRINGS BACK HIS HIT ONE-MAN SHOW   “NOT A GENUINE BLACK MAN.”  >>I DON’T TALK GHETTO.   WHEN I HEAR THE WORD “AX” I   THINK OF IT AS A NOUN.   [ LAUGHTER ]  >>>GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO   KQED “NEWSROOM.”   I’M THUY VU.   WE BEGIN TONIGHT WITH SOMETHING   MOST OF US WOULD FEEL LOST   WITHOUT — OUR CELL PHONES.   WE USE THEM NOT ONLY TO KEEP IN   TOUCH WITH FAMILY AND FRIENDS   BUT ALSO FOR BANKING, STORING   PHOTOS, SURFING THE WEB, EVEN   CHECKING OUR HEALTH RECORDS.   THEY CONTAIN INTIMATE DETAILS OF   OUR LIVES.   NEXT WEEK, THE U.S. SUPREME   COURT CONSIDERS THIS QUESTION —   AFTER ARRESTING SOMEONE, CAN   POLICE SEARCH THAT PERSON’S CELL   PHONE WITHOUT A WARRANT?   SCOTT SHAFER LEADS OUR   DISCUSSION.  >>SEARCHING CELL PHONES CAN   HELP POLICE SOLVE CRIMES, BUT   PRIVACY ADVOCATES SAY DOING IT   WITHOUT A WARRANT VIOLATES THE   FOURTH AMENDMENT WHICH PROHIBITS   UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND   SEIZURES.   JOINING ME TO EXPLORE THE DEBATE   ARE PROFESSOR RORY IT WILLE WITH   UC HASTINGS COLLEGE OF LAW AND   MICHELLE QUINN, “SAN JOSE   MERCURY NEWS” COLUMNIST IN.   WELL, FOLKS, THIS IS ACTUALLY   TWO CASES BEFORE THE SUPREME   COURT NEXT WEEK, ONE IS A   CALIFORNIA CASE.   THE SAN DIEGO POLICE PULLED OVER   A GUY, YOUNG MAN WHO WAS   DRIVING, HE HAD A SUSPENDED   LICENSE, HE HAD EXPIRED TAGS.   RORY LITTLE, WHY DID THEY HAVE A   NEED TO LOOK AT HIS PHONE AND   WHAT DID THEY FIND?  >>WELL, IT’S ALMOST STANDARD   PROCEDURE FOR POLICE TO LOOK AT   A PHONE IF THEY CAN.   THEY ARRESTED HIM.   THERE’S A RULE THAT SAYS   NORMALLY WHEN YOU ARREST   SOMEBODY YOU CAN LOOK AT   WHATEVER THEY’RE CARRYING AND IT   TURNED OUT THIS GUY WHO WAS   STOPPED FOR A TRAFFIC VIOLATION   WAS CONNECTED BY VIDEO ON HIS   PHONE TO A PRIOR DRIVE-BY GANG   SHOOTING.   AND SO THEY SORT OF LITTLE BY   LITTLE GOT EVIDENCE FROM HIS   PHONE TO TIE THEM TO THE   SHOOTING AND THAT’S WHAT HE WAS   ULTIMATELY PROSECUTED FOR.  >>SO THAT EVIDENCE WAS CRITICAL   TO HIS CONVICTION AND HE’S SERVE   15G YEARS TO LIFE.  >>15 YEARS WITH A GANG   ENHANCEMENT PROVED BY VIDEO   WHERE THERE WAS EVIDENCE THAT HE   WAS A MEMBER OF ONE GANG AND   SHOUTING ENCOURAGEMENT TO OTHER   GANG MEMBERS.  >>SO IF THIS GENTLEMAN HAD AN   ADDRESS BOOK ON HIS SEAT THE   POLICE COULD HAVE SEARCHED THAT,   NO PROBLEM.   THEY SEARCHED THE PHONE.   WHY IS THAT DIFFERENT, MICHELLE?  >>WELL, I’M GOING TO HOLD UP MY   PHONE BECAUSE WE ALL HAVE PHONES   HERE.   THIS IS, ACCORDING TO CIVIL   LIBERTARIANS, THE EQUIVALENT OF   HAVING YOUR ENTIRE LIFE’S DATA.   IT’S BIGGER THAN JUST HAVING ONE   ADDRESS BOOK OR PIECE OF PAPER   OR A MAP ON THE FRONT OF YOUR   SEAT.   THIS IS LIKE HAVING ACCESS TO   ALL YOUR FILE, VIDEOS, IT’S —  >>BANKS, HEALTH RECORDS.  >>EVERYTHING.   AND SO BEING ABLE TO SEARCH YOUR   PHONE IS BEING ABLE TO SEARCH   EVERYTHING — WHERE YOU’VE BEEN,   WHAT YOU’VE SEARCHED ON YOUR   PHONE, YOUR LOCATION.   AND SO THIS — WHAT THE ARGUMENT   IS, AND THIS IS WHAT THE SUPREME   COURT IS GOING TO HEAR ON   TUESDAY, IS THE CIVIL   LIBERTARIANS SAY THIS IS — THIS   NEEDS SPECIAL PROTECTION.   YOU CAN LOOK FOR EVERYTHING IN A   PERSON’S CAR WHEN YOU ARREST   THEM OR ON THEIR PERSON THERE’S   SOMETHING SPECIAL ABOUT THIS.  >>SO SEARCHING THE PHONE IS   LIKE GOING INTO SOMEONE’S HOUSE   AND LOOKING THROUGH THEIR FILES   AND EVERYTHING ELSE.  >>SO THE ANALOGIES BREAK DOWN.   THE GOVERNMENT SAYS THIS IS NO   DIFFERENT THAN YOUR WALLET.   AND IF THEY ARREST YOU THEY CAN   LOOK THROUGH YOUR WALLET.   AND THE DEFENSE SAYS NO, THIS IS   YOUR ENTIRE HOUSE.   THIS IS MORE THAN YOUR HOUSE,   BANK RECORDS AND EVERYTHING.   THERE’S ALSO A FIRST AMENDMENT   ASPECT TO THIS.   THE DEFENSE SAYS THIS IS   PROFOUNDLY EXPRESSIVE BECAUSE   PEOPLE MAKE VIDEOS, PEOPLE TAKE   SELFIES.   SO IT’S A — IT’S REALLY   INTRUSIVE.  >>NOW THE OTHER CASE, THE ONE   ON THE EAST COAST, THE GUY HAD A   FLIP PHONE, NOT A SMART PHONE, A   DUMB PHONE.   IS THERE A DIFFERENCE?   NIGHT SUPREME COURT FIND —   WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE IN TERMS   OF CIVIL LIBERTIESTOR LAW?  >>WELL, I DON’T KNOW ABOUT THE   LAW BUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A   FLIP PHONE IN 2007 AND IPHONE   TODAY OR EVEN 2009 IS VAST.   JUST THE STORAGE CAPABILITY.   THE AMOUNT OF VIDEO, THE AMOUNT   OF DOCUMENTS.   ALL YOUR E-MAIL THAT YOU CAN   ACCESS.   AND THE FIRST DISTRICT — THE   FIRST COURT OF APPEALS AGREED   WITH THE DEFENDANT AND SAID, YOU   KNOW, THEY CAN’T SEARCH.  >>THEY CAN’T DO THE SEARCH.  >>SO I THINK ONE THING THAT I   THINK THE COURT WILL BE THINKING   ABOUT, AND I’D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT   YOU THINK, IS WHAT IS REASONABLE   FOR A POLICE OFFICER IN THIS   SITUATION?   DO THEY NEED TO KNOW, WELL,   LOOK, THAT CELL PHONE HAS THIS   MUCH STORAGE.  >>YEAH, WHERE’S THE LINE.  >>I CAN’T LOOK AT THIS ONE BUT   I CAN LOOK AT THAT ONE.  >>HERE’S THE INTERESTING POINT.   FLIP PHONE LOOKS OLD-FASHIONED   AND ANTIQUATED TODAY BECAUSE WE   HAVE IPHONES.   FIVE YEARS FROM NOW PEOPLE WILL   WATCH THAT TAPE AND SAY “LOOK AT   THAT OLD-FASHIONED PHONE.   WE NOW HAVE GOOGLE GLASSES OR   GOOGLE CONTACT LENSES” AND THAT   CARRIES EVERYTHING.   SO THE TECHNOLOGY — THE COURT   HAS TO BE WORRIED ABOUT NOT JUST   TODAY BUT WHAT IS GOING TO BE   TRUE FIVE YEARS FROM NOW.   THAT’S THE CLASH TODAY.   OLD RULES THAT YOU CAN SEARCH   EVERYTHING VERSUS OLD RULES THAT   SAY YOU CAN’T SEARCH SOMEBODY’S   HOUSE.  >>AND THE POLICE SAY, LOOK, IF   WE DIDN’T SEARCH — IF WE HADN’T   SEARCHED THAT GUYS PHONE RIGHT   AWAY, THE PASS CODE WOULD HAVE   KICKED IN, IT WOULD HAVEN’T —   IT WOULD HAVE LOCKED, THERE   THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN AN APP ON   THE PHONE THAT WITH ONE PHONE   CALL COULD HAVE DELETED   EVERYTHING, WE WOULD HAVE LOST   THE EVIDENCE FOREVER.   WHAT’S THE RESPONSE TO THAT?  >>THAT’S A GREAT POINT.   THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THE   GOVERNMENT FEELS STRONGLY ABOUT   BECAUSE I THINK THE DEFENSE SAYS   JUST GET A WARRANT THEN YOU CAN   SEARCH ALL YOU WANT.  >>HOLD ON TO IT.  >>YOU HAVE FORENSICS, YOU CAN   TAKE IT TO AN APPLE STORE AND   THE GOVERNMENT SAYS YOU KNOW WE   DON’T HAVE TIME.   WE HAVE TO GET TO THAT PHONE AND   GRAB IT AND ONE OF THE   RATIONALES FOR BEING ABLE TO   GRAB THINGS WHEN YOU ARREST A   PERSON IS TO STOP THE   DESTRUCTION OF EVIDENCE.   THAT’S ONE OF THE MAIN ONES.   AND THEY SAY WELL, WE HAVE TO   HAVE IT.   AND THE RESPONSE IS FROM PEOPLE   WHO FILE BRIEFS FROM THE DEFENSE   LAWYERS IS IT’S ACTUALLY —   THERE ARE THINGS YOU CAN DO.   YOU CAN DROP IT INTO A — WHAT’S   THE NAME OF THAT BAG?   YOU CAN DROP IT INTO A BAG WITH   TINFOIL ON.  >>IT BUT TECHNOLOGY IS ALWAYS   CHANGING.   IT’S HARD TO FUTURE PROOF ANY   KIND OF A DECISION.   SO WHERE DO YOU DRAW THE LINE IN   TERMS OF WHAT’S A REASONABLE   EXPECTATION FOR PRIVACY?  >>WELL, THAT’S A REALLY GOOD   QUESTION AND WHO SHOULD DRAW   THAT LINE?   THE INTERESTING SOMETHING WHEN   CALIFORNIA FIRST SAID YOU CAN   SEARCH A CELL PHONE THE   LEGISLATURE IMMEDIATELY PASSED A   LAW SAYING YOU’VE GOT TO HAVE A   WARRANT TO SEARCH AN ELECTRONIC   DEVICE.  >>WHICH THE GOVERNOR VETOED.  >>WELL, THE GOVERNOR VETOED IT   A WEEK AFTER THE SUPREME COURT   DECLINED REVIEW IN THAT CASE.   SO THERE YOU HAVE — AND WHY DID   THEY DECLINE REVIEW?   THEY THOUGHT THE LEGISLATURE WAS   GOING TO TAKE CARE OF IT.   SO WHO DECIDES WHAT’S REASONABLE   ANDS WHERE THE PRIVACY LINE?   I THINK YOU’RE GOING TO SEE THE   COURT TRYING TO MOVE SLOWLY HERE   AND THEY’RE GOING TO DIVIDE.   I THINK YOU’LL SEE MORE THAN TWO   OPINIONS, CERTAINLY MORE THAN   ONE.   AND THEY’LL SAY, YOU KNOW, WE   DON’T KNOW WHAT THE RULES SHOULD   BE IN EVERY CASE.   WE’LL DRAW NUANCED RULES FOR   THESE CASES.   WE’RE NOT GOING TO WORRY ABOUT   FAIR DAY BAGS BECAUSE NO ONE HAD   ONE HERE.   WE WON’T WORRY ABOUT THE WIPING   TECHNOLOGY BECAUSE THERE’S NO   EVIDENCE ANYBODY USED THE WIPING   TECHNOLOGY HERE.  >>BUT THEY COULD HAVE.  >>AND THE INTERESTING SOMETHING   NO ONE HAS ANY CASE TO SUPPORT   THEM.   SO THE DEFENSE DOESN’T HAVE ANY   CASE WHERE THE GOVERNMENT HAS   GONE THROUGH SOMEBODY’S CELL   PHONE AND EXPOSED HORRIBLE   PRIVATE DETAILS.   MEANWHILE, THE GOVERNMENT   DOESN’T HAVE ANY CASE WHERE   WIPING ACTUALLY HAPPENED RIGHT   AFTER THEY ARRESTED SOMEBODY.   SO IT’S ALL BASED ON SORT OF OUR   FEAR OF THE FUTURE.  >>WHAT IS SILICON VALLEY   THINKING?   I DON’T KNOW HOW AWARE THEY ARE   OF THIS CASE BUT TECHNOLOGY IS   AT THE HEART OF THIS QUESTION.  >>WELL, SILICON VALUELY IS IN   ITS OWN FIGHT ABOUT THE KILL   SWITCH SO THAT YOUR PHONE IS   STOLEN AND CAN YOU JUST —  >>TURN IT INTO A BRICK.  >>UNLESS IT’S STOLEN BY THE   POLICE WHEN THEY ARREST YOU.  >>RIGHT.   SO YOU PROBABLY SAW OR HEARD   THAT THERE WAS A BILL BY THE   SAME SENATOR, THE STATE SENATOR   THAT DIED THIS WEEK, WHICH WOULD   HAVE REQUIRED ALL PHONES IN   CALIFORNIA TO BE MADE WITH A   KILL SWITCH.  >>THE COURT, OF COURSE, RORY,   HAS TAKEN UP TECHNOLOGY ISSUES   BEFORE.   BASED ON WHAT THEY’VE DONE, HOW   ARE THEY GOING TO LOOK AT THIS,   DO YOU THINK?  >>YOU MAY REMEMBER A COUPLE   YEARS AGO THEY HAD A GPS CASE.   SOMEBODY PUT A TRACKING DEVICE   ON A CAR.   THE COURT DIVIDED INTO FOUR   DIFFERENT GROUPS.   THESE ARE ONLY NINE JUSTICES,   FOUR DIFFERENT GROUPS, EVEN THE   PEOPLE THAT AGREED ON THE RESULT   COULD NOT AGREE ON THE RATIONALE   AND TECHNOLOGY SORT OF SCARES   THEM.   THERE ARE JUSTICES ON THAT COURT   WHO PROBABLY DO NOT KNOW HOW A   SMART PHONE WORKS AND OTHER   JUSTICES PROBABLY USE THEIR   SMART PHONE ALL THE TIME.   SO JUSTICE SCALIA, INTERESTINGLY   ENOUGH, IS SIDING WITH LIBERALS   ON THE SEARCH ISSUES THESE DAYS.   JUSTICE BREYER FROM SAN   FRANCISCO TENDS TO NOW SIDE WITH   THE GOVERNMENT.   SO THE POLITICS HAVE FLIPPED A   LITTLE BIT.   SO THIS CASE, I PREDICT, WILL BE   SLOW AND DIVIDED.  >>AND WE SHOULD EXPECT A RULING   AS ALWAYS BY THE END OF JUNE?  >>I’M EXPECTING JUNE 25.  >>THAT’S YOUR PREDICTION.   AND IF THEY RULE IN FAVOR OF THE   DEFENDANT IT GOES BACK DOWN TO   THE TRIAL COURT AGAIN?   THE GOVERNMENT DECIDES WHETHER   TO RETRY HIM?  >>YES, IF THEY — YES.   ALMOST NO MATTER WHO THEY RULE   FOR IT’S GOING TO GO BACK DOWN   FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS.  >>RORY LITTLE, MICHELLE QUINN,   INTERESTING.   I’M SURE WE’LL BE TALKING MORE   ABOUT THIS IN THE FUTURE.   THANKS.  >>THANKS.  >>>SAN FRANCISCO MAYOR ED LEE   HAS HIS WORK CUT OUT FOR HIM   DESPITE THE CITY’S ECONOMIC   RECOVERY.   THIS WEEK, THE HIGH TECH BOOM IN   SAN FRANCISCO KEPT ROLLING ALONG   AS THE LEASE WAS SIGNED FOR A   NEW BUILDING.   BUT WITH THE BOOM COMES GROWING   PAINS.   MANY LONG-TIME AND MIDDLE-INCOME   RESIDENTS ARE FEELING SQUEEZED   OUT, BLAMING THE TECH EXPLOSION   FOR SKYROCKETING HOUSING COSTS   AND ESCALATING CULTURE WARS.   IN HIS RECENT STATE OF THE CITY   ADDRESS, MAYOR LEE ACKNOWLEDGED   THE PROBLEM.  >>THE RISING COST OF LIVING,   THE FINANCIAL SQUEEZE ON OUR   CITY’S WORKING FAMILIES AND   MIDDLE-CLASS, THESE ARE THE   FUNDAMENTAL CHALLENGES OF OUR   TIME.  >>IN ADDITION, CITY COLLEGE OF   SAN FRANCISCO IS STRUGGLING TO   KEEP ITS ACCREDITATION TO SERVE   TENS OF THOUSANDS OF STUDENTS.   AND THE RECENT CORRUPTION   SCANDAL INVOLVING STATE SENATOR   LELAND YEE HAS PROMPTED   QUESTIONS ABOUT POLITICAL   ETHICS.   HERE NOW TO DISCUSS THIS ISSUE   AND MORE IS MAYOR ED LEE   HIMSELF.   WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM.  >>THANK YOU, IT’S GREAT TO BE   HERE.  >>A DRAMATIC SHIFT.   THE WARRIORS WILL BUILD THEIR   SAN FRANCISCO IN SAN FRANCISCO’S   MISSION BAY, DROPPING THEIR   PLANS FOR PEERS 30 AND 32.   YOU SAID AT ONE NINETY THE PIERS   30 AND 32 DEVELOPMENT WAS YOUR   “LEGACY PROJECT.”   DO YOU STILL FEEL THAT WAY.   DID YOU UNDERESTIMATE THE   INTENSITY OF THE OPPOSITION TO   THAT?  >>WELL I WAS ALWAYS EXCITED   FROM DAY ONE WHERE THE OWNERS   CAME OVER AND SAID WE’RE REALLY   INTERESTED IN COMING TO SAN   FRANCISCO AND WHAT WOULD BE THE   PLACE AND WE WERE THERE WITH THE   CHAIRS, WITH THE OWNERS AND THE   PLAYERS ON PIER 3032 BUT WE   UNDERSTAND AS TIME WENT ON THAT   IT WAS GETTING MORE AND MORE   EXPENSIVE.   SEISMIC RETROFIT OF PIERS IS   EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE.   AND, YEAH, THE WATERFRONT IS   VALUED IN MANY WAYS BY PEOPLE   THAT LIVE THERE AND I THINK THE   WARRIORS TOOK ALL OF THAT IN   CONSIDERATION.   WE WERE STILL RIGHT DOWN TO JUST   A MONTH AGO STILL READY TO GO AT   IT BUT I THINK WE PIVOT AND WE   PIVOT WITH THE RIGHT REASONS.   WARRIORS STILL WANT TO BE HERE,   THEY’RE INVESTOR-CONFIDENT IN   THE CITY SO I’M VERY HAPPY, VERY   HAPPY TO SEE THEM SAY, HEY, NOT   ONLY DO WE HAVE A PLACE WE CAN   BUILD, WE OWN IT NOW.   SO THEY’RE NOT LEASING   ANYMORE,ENED I THINK THEIR   INVESTORS ARE THAT MUCH HAPPIER.  >>SO THE FOLKS WHO ARE BEHIND   PROPOSITION B WHICH WOULD   REQUIRE VOTER APPROVAL OF ANY   DEVELOPMENT THAT WANTS TO EXCEED   CURRENT HEIGHT LIMITS ON THE   WATERFRONT, THEY’RE HAILING THIS   MOVE AS A VICTORY FOR THEM.   THE WARRIORS MOVING TO MISSION   BAY.   WHERE DO YOU STAND ON PROP B?  >>WELL, FIRST OF ALL, GOOD FOR   THEM.   YOU KNOW, I HAVE STAYED AWAY   FROM PROP B.   I DIDN’T WANT TO GET INTO   ANOTHER FIGHT.   I DO SEE THAT, YOU KNOW, BALLOT   BOX DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS IS   PROBABLY NOT THE WAY TO GO.   I DO NOT WANT THAT TO OCCUR BUT   I UNDERSTAND WHY IT DID.  >>THIS IS A CITY WHERE THE TECH   BOOK IS IN FULL SWING BUT THE   MEDIAN HOME PRICE IS NOW   APPROACHING ONE MILLION DOLLARS.   A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE FEELING   PRICED OUT.   WHAT ARE YOU DOING TO ADDRESS   THIS?  >>WELL, FIRST OF ALL, THUY, I   WANT TO PUT IN THE GOOD   PERSPECTIVE.   IT’S A GOOD THING THAT WE’VE GOT   IN CHALLENGE IN THAT THERE’S   INVESTOR CONFIDENCE AND PEOPLE   WANT TO MOVE HERE, BUSINESSES.   IT’S GREAT FOR PEOPLE WHO NEED   JOBS.   THAT’S STILL OUR NUMBER ONE   PRIORITY.   HAVING SAID THAT, I RECOGNIZE   THE CHALLENGE AND THE CHALLENGE   IS WE HAVE NOT BUILT ENOUGH   HOUSING IN THE PAST.   WE KIND OF LET THAT GO AS A   PRIORITY AND NOW WE’RE GOING TO   SUFFER FOR IT.   SO I WANT TO BUILD A LOT OF THE   HOUSING THAT WE NEED.   I THINK WE CAN DEFINITELY BUILD   A LOT MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING   AND WORK ON THE OTHER THINGS   THAT MAKE THE CITY AFFORDABLE.   AND IT’S NOT JUST ABOUT   BUILDING.   WE ALSO WANT TO PROTECT THE   EXISTING HOUSING STOCK, AND   THAT’S WHY I’M WORKING WITH   SENATOR LENO TO REFORM THE ELLIS   ACT TO MAKE SURE WE’RE NOT   HAVING THESE COMPANIES COME IN   AND BUILD A BUSINESS AROUND   EVICTING LONG-TERM TENANTS.   I’M A BIG RENT CONTROL SUPPORTER   FOR THAT.   I’M GOING TO MAKE SURE 30,000   HOUSING UNITS GET BUILT AND A   THIRD OF THEM PERMANENTLY   AFFORDABLE AND THAT WILL BE A   HUGE CONTRIBUTION TO THIS   LANDSCAPE.  >>BUT EVEN SO, THERE ARE MANY   WHO FEEL THAT THE ESSENCE OF SAN   FRANCISCO, WHAT MAKES IT SPECIAL   AND UNIQUE, IS BEING LOST WITH   ALL THESE CHANGES GOING ON.   HOW DO YOU BALANCE THAT?   THE BUSINESS GROWTH WITH PEOPLE   FEELING PUSHED OUT?  >>WELL, BUT FOR THE GROWTH   THAT’S OCCURRING WE WOULD   HAVEN’T THE REVENUES THAT WE   WERE SEEKING JUST LITERALLY   THREE YEARS AGO TO PAY FOR   IMPORTANT SOCIAL PROGRAMS THAT   EVERYBODY VALUES.   THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS   CUTTING HIV AND AIDS RESEARCH.   THERE’S A LOT OF ISSUES AROUND   THE HOMELESS.   WE’RE NOT SEEING A WHOLE LOT OF   FEDERAL DOLLARS TO WE HAD TO   MAKE IT UP OURSELVES AND AS A   RESULT I’VE GOT TO HAVE THAT   INCREASED REVENUE.   I’VE GOT TO HAVE A REVENUE WILL   PAY FOR A HOUSING TRUST FUND AT   $1.5 BILLION TO HELP WITH   AFFORDABLE HOUSING.   THIS WOULDN’T HAPPEN WITHOUT A   ROBUST ECONOMY.  >>LET’S TALK ABOUT CITY   COLLEGE.   THE LARGEST PUBLIC COLLEGE IN   CALIFORNIA, SERVING NEARLY   80,000 STUDENTS NOW FACING   LOSESING ITS ACCREDITATION.   SOME PEOPLE FEEL YOU HAVEN’T   TAKEN AN AGGRESSIVE ENOUGH   STANCE TO PROTECT CITY COLLEGE.  >>OH, I’VE BEEN VERY, VERY MUCH   INTERESTED IN MAKING SURE THAT   OUR CITY COLLEGE IS HERE.   I’VE SAID THAT OVER AND OVER   AGAIN.   IT’S ABOUT HOW YOU DO IT AND   CERTAINLY I’M WELL AWARE THERE’S   LAWSUITS, THERE’S PROTESTS   AROUND THIS.   I ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT   THE TROUBLES THAT THEY HAD   FINANCIALLY ARE TAKEN CARE OF   BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT STARTED IT.   THEY WERE NOT GOING TO BE   SUSTAINABLE FINANCIALLY.   THEY WERE, I THINK, ON THE CLIFF   AND WE PULLED THEM BACK, I THINK   WE DID A LOT OF GOOD THINGS,   PARTICULARLY IN THE LAST YEAR.   AND NOW WE HAVE A BASIS TO   SUGGEST TO THE ACCREDITATION   COMMISSION WE’RE REALLY CLOSE TO   BEING THERE.   YOU HAVE TO RECOGNIZE ALL THE   THINGS THAT WE’VE DONE AND IN   THAT RECOGNITION I KNOW THAT   WE’VE DONE YOU HAVE NO SAVE CITY   COLLEGE.  >>LAST ME ASK YOU REAL QUICKLY   ABOUT LELAND YEE, THE CORRUPTION   SCANDAL INVOLVING STATE SENATOR   LELAND YEE.   ARE THERE REFORMS YOU WOULD LIKE   TO SEE COME OUT OF THAT?  >>I’M ONE OF THE FIRST PEOPLE   TO SAY I’M SHOCKED.   A VETERAN PUBLIC OFFICE HOLDER   CAN ENGAGE HIMSELF IN THE KINDS   OF ALLEGATIONS THAT THE FBI HAS   UNCOVERED.   THIS IS SHOCKING TO ALL OF US.   HAVING SAID THAT, I THINK THAT   THE WAY WE FEEL IS THAT IT’S NOT   SO MUCH NEW REFORM, IT’S GETTING   BACK TO THE BASICS OF PUBLIC   OFFICE.   WE HAVE TO HONOR OUR PUBLIC AND   THEIR TRUST.   WE HAVE TO REBUILD IT AND THAT   MEANS MORE AND MORE DECISIONS   THAT REFLECT THIS TRUST.  >>LET’S END ON GOOD NEWS.   PAUL McCARTNEY WILL BE PLAYING   AT CANDLESTICK, COMING BACK TO   THE VENUE WHERE THE BEATLES   PLAYED THEIR LAST CONCERT IN   1966.  >>THUY, I’M GOING ASK YOU WHAT   YOUR FAVORITE BEATLES SONG IS AS   WELL.  >>”LOVE ME DO.”   AND YOURS?  >>OH, GOSH, “SHE LOVES ME” AND   THESE DAYS IT’S ABOUT “HARD   DAY’S NIGHT.”   BUT I REALLY WANT TO THANK SIR   PAUL McCARTNEY.   HE’S SUCH A CLASS ACT.   HE COULD HAVE CHOSEN ANY PLACE   AROUND THE WORLD AND HE CHOSE   SAN FRANCISCO.  >>MAYOR ED LEE, THANK YOU SO   MUCH FOR JOINING US.  >>THANK YOU, THUY.  >>>COMEDIAN AND TALK SHOW HOST   BRIAN COPELAND KNOWS HOW IT   FEELS TO BE AN OUTSIDER.   HE GREW UP DURING THE 1970s AND   WAS THE ONLY AFRICAN-AMERICAN   STUDENT IN SAN LEANDRO HIGH   SCHOOL OF 350.   AS A KID HE WEATHERED PHYSICAL   ABUSE FROM HIS FATHER,   DISCRIMINATION BY LOCAL POLICE   AND EFFORTS BY A RACIST LANDLORD   TO EVICT HIS FAMILY FROM THEIR   APARTMENT.   HE SHAPED THOSE EXPERIENCES INTO   A ONE-MAN SHOW “NOT A GENUINE   BLACK MAN.”   THE 10th ANNIVERSARY PRODUCTION   OPENS AT BERKLEE REP.   HE SAT DOWN RECENTLY SCOTT   SHAFER.   BUT, FIRST, A CLIP FROM KQED’S   ARCHIVES OF “NOT A GENUINE BLACK   MAN” IN 2005.  >>I DON’T EVEN KNOW WHAT THAT   MEANS.   IF YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT PIGMENT   CLEARLY I AM BLACK BUT IF YOU’RE   TALKING ABOUT SOME CULTURAL   DELINEATION, I DON’T KNOW.   I DON’T TALK GHETTO.   WHEN I HEAR THE WORD “AX” I   THINK OF IT AS A NOUN.   [ LAUGHTER ]   IT’S NOT AER HAVE B.   “I’M GONNA AX MY MOTHER.”   WHAT ARE YOU LIZZIE BORDEN?   GET OUT OF HERE!  >>BRIAN COPELAND, WELCOME.   IS.  >>THANKS FOR HAVING ME.   IS IT BAD FORM TO LAUGH AT MY   OWN JOKES?  >>NOT AT ALL.  >>THE SHOW BEGINS WITH AN   ANONYMOUS LETTER FROM SOMEONE   WHO ACCUSES YOU OF NOT BEING   BLACK ENOUGH.   AND WHEN YOU BOIL THAT SENTIMENT   DOWN WHAT DO YOU FIND?  >>WHAT YOU FIND IS THERE ARE   PEOPLE IN EVERY CULTURE WHO   BELIEVE THEY ARE THE POLICE AND   THEY GET TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR   NOT YOU ARE REALLY AN   AFRICAN-AMERICAN OR REALLY A   LATINO OR — I TO DO A THING   WITH MIKE WALLACE A FEW YEARS   BACK AND HE ASKED ME WHAT THE   SHOW WAS ABOUT AND I TOLD HIM   AND HE LAUGHED AND HE SAID EVERY   TIME I DO A STORY THAT’S EVEN   THE LEAST BIT CRITICAL OF ISRAEL   I GET ALL THESE LETTERS SAYING   YOU’RE NOT A REAL JEW, A GENUINE   JEW WOULD NEVER CRITICIZE ISRAEL   UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.  >>BUT THAT SENTIMENT COULD COME   FROM AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN, IT   COULD COME FROM A WHITE PERSON   OR ANYONE ELSE.   IS IT DIFFERENT DEPENDING ON WHO   IT COMES FROM?  >>I THINK IT IS.   I DO HEAR IT MORE OR HAVE HEARD   IT MORE FROM AFRICAN-AMERICANS   AND THAT LETTER CAME FROM AN   AFRICAN-AMERICAN.   ALTHOUGH FROM WHITE PEOPLE YOU   DO GET “WELL, IT’S NOT LIKE   YOU’RE BLACK.”   WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT?   EXCUSE ME.   THE FIRST QUESTION AT THE   YOUTUBE DEBATE IN 2008 WHEN   BARACK OBAMA WAS RUNNING WAS   “ARE YOU BLACK ENOUGH?”   AND HE SAID “WELL, I CAN’T GET A   CAB.”  >>THERE’S A RIFF IN THE SHOW   THAT I WANT TO PLAY A CLIP FROM   WHERE YOU TALK ABOUT RACIAL   AUTHENTICITY.   I WANT TO PLAY THAT AND THEN   WE’LL COME BACK AND TALK ABOUT   IT.  >>WHAT IS IT THAT MAKES THE   RACIAL AUTHENTICITY OF A   SUCCESSFUL BLACK MALE IN THIS   SOCIETY SUSPECT?   IT REALLY PISSES ME OFF WHEN I   THINK ABOUT IT.   BECAUSE YOU GO TO EAST OAKLAND   OR BAY VIEW, HUNTERS POINT AND   YOU’LL SEE ALL THESE GUYS   SELLING CRACK AND ALL THESE GUYS   WITH FIVE BABIES BY FIVE   DIFFERENT WOMEN.   NONE OF THEM THAT THEY’RE   SUPPORTING AND NOBODY’S SAYING   THEY’RE NOT REAL BLACK MEN.  >>THAT’S A VERY PROVOCATIVE   QUESTION.   WHAT IS IT ABOUT A SUCCESS THAT   MAKES AUTHENTICITY SUSPECT?   WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THAT HAVE?  >>I THINK IT’S BIZARRE.   IT’S THE CRAP AND THE BARREL   MENTALITY.   THAT IN SOME WAY IF YOU HAVE   TRANSCENDED YOUR ORIGINS YOU ARE   IN SOME WAY SELLING OUT.   AND I FOUND THAT FASCINATING   THAT THEY WILL POINT FOR THEIR   FOLKS WHO WILL POINT AT A BILL   COSBY, FOR EXAMPLE, AND SAY BILL   COSBY’S NOT REALLY BLACK BECAUSE   OF WHAT IT IS HE’S DONE AND   ACHIEVED AND ACCOMPLISHED.   HOWEVER, YOU KNOW, IF BILL COSBY   WERE STANDING ON A STREET CORNER   SELLING CLA INING CRACK THEY MIGHT SAY   OTHER THINGS ABOUT HIM BUT THEY   WOULD NEVER SAY HE’S NOT BLACK   AND I FIND THAT TO BE BIZARRE.   WHAT IS IT ABOUT SUCCESS THAT IS   SOMEHOW A BETRAYAL OF YOUR   CULTURE?   I DON’T GET IT.  >>THIS SHOW IS TOLD, MUCH OF   IT, THROUGH THE EYES OF AN   EIGHT-YEAR-OLD BOY, YOU, LIVING   IN SAN LEANDRO BACK IN THE EARLY   ’70s AND IT HAS SOME OF THE MOST   DIFFICULT THEMES: DOMESTIC   VIOLENCE, YOUR FATHER KNOCKING   YOUR MOTHER AGAINST THE WALL,   YOUR ATTEMPTED SUICIDE.   AND YET IT’S VERY MUCH   INTERWOVEN WITH ALL THAT IS   HUMOR.   TALK ABOUT THAT JUXTAPOSITION.  >>WHEN I FIRST STARTED TO WRITE   THIS SHOW I KNEW THE RHYTHMS I   WANTED.   I WANTED THE RHYTHMS THAT NORMAN   LEAR HAD IN THOSE GREAT SITCOMS   FROM THE ’70s.   BECAUSE AS A KID MY MOTHER   WOULD — WE’S ‘D SIT ON THE   FLOOR AND WE’D WATCH “ALL IN THE   FAMILY” AND MAUDE AND THEN   REMEMBER IT WAS REALLY FUNNY AND   THEN EDITH GOT RAINED.   THIS WAS A SITCOM?   WHERE DID THIS COME FROM?   THEN IT WAS REALLY FUNNY AGAIN.   THAT’S HOW LIFE IS.   THEN I WATCHED THE FIRST FEW   SEASONS AND THAT’S HOW I CAME UP   WITH ONE MINUTE YOU’RE LAUGHING   THEN YOU’RE KICKED IN THE GUT.   THEN YOU’RE LAUGHING THEN KICKED   IN THE GUT.   I DIG A BIG HOLE THEN SAY   SOMETHING FUNNY AND PULL YOU OUT   OF IT.  >>IS THAT HUMOR A WAY TO BRING   PEOPLE IN SO THAT THEY CAN   REALLY THINK ABOUT THE NUANCES   OF PREJUDICE AND THE OTHER   THINGS YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT?  >>OH, ABSOLUTELY.   IT’S THE SPOON THIS FUL OF SUGAR I   LIKE TO SAY.   OTHERWISE IT WOULD BE TOO   PAINFUL FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE TO   DIGEST.  >>I KNOW YOU’VE GOT THREE KIDS.   HAVE THEY SEEN THE SHOW?   I WOULD GUESS THEY HAVE.   WHAT DO THEY THINK ABOUT IT?   HOW DO THEY FEEL ABOUT THE   FAMILY’S DIRTY LAUNDRY, SO TO   SPEAK, BEING AIRED?  >>WHEN THE SHOW OPENED MY KIDS   WERE 15 AND 13 AND THE YOUNGER   ONE WAS NINE.   IN FACT, I LEARNED HOW TO   PORTRAY AN EIGHT-YEAR-OLD BOY   BECAUSE HE WAS EIGHT WHEN I WAS   WRITING THE SHOW AND I WATCHED   HIM AND HOW HE TALKED AND HOW HE   MOVED.   IT WAS A LONG TIME BEFORE I LET   HIM SEE IT.   THE SHOW RAN SEVEN YEARS.   BECAUSE HE WAS JUST TOO YOUNG.   THE OLDER KIDS, I GAVE THEM A   HEADS UP AND I HAD TO TELL THEM   ABOUT CERTAIN THINGS AND THERE   IS A SCENE WHERE I’M REALLY,   REALLY DEPRESSED AND I TALK   ABOUT THIS EXPERIENCE I ADD IN A   CAR WITH CARBON MONOXIDE THEY   DIDN’T KNOW ABOUT.   AND I KIND OF HAD TO WARN THEM   AND IT WAS INTERESTING THAT THEY   CAME OUT OF THE SHOW SAYING   “WOW, DAD, WE HAVE A GREATER   UNDERSTANDING OF YOU BECAUSE NOW   WE KNOW WHAT YOU DEALT WITH AND   WHERE YOU CAME FROM.”  >>AND FINALLY, YOU’VE BEEN   DOING THIS SHOW FOR TEN YEARS.   HOW MUCH OF V THINGS CHANGES IN   SAN LEANDRO AND ELSEWHERE?  >>WELL, ACCORDING TO THE LATEST   CENSUS, SAN LEANDRO IS ONE OF   THE MOST DIVERSE CITIES IN   AMERICA.   IN AMERICA!   WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PERCENTAGE   OF AFRICAN-AMERICANS AND ASIANS   AND LATINOS AND SO FORTH IN THE   COUNTRY, SAN LEANDRO MIRRORS   THAT.   SO IT’S FASCINATING AND IT’S   GREAT.  >>WELL, THE SHOW, AGAIN, IS   CALLED “NOT A GENUINE BLACK MAN”   PLAYING AT BERKLEE REPERTOIRE   THEATER THROUGH MAY.   BRIAN COPELAND, THANKS FOR   COMING IN.  >>THANKS FOR HAVING ME.   PLEASURE.  >>>JOINING ME NOW FOR A LOOK AT   OTHER STORIES WE’RE WATCHING IS   SCOTT SHAFER.   HI SCOTT.  >>HI, THUY.  >>FOUR MAJOR TECH COMPANIES   SETTLED A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT   AND BASICALLY EMPLOYEES ALLEGED   THAT APPLE, GOOGLE AND OTHERS   HAD AN ANTI-POACHING AGREEMENT   TO PREVENT THEM FROM STEALING   EACH OTHER’S EMPLOYEES.   WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT THE   SETTLEMENT?  >>THE PARTIES THEMSELVES DIDN’T   REVEAL ANYTHING BUT REUTERS   REPORTED THAT THE COMPANY HAS   AGREED TO PAY OUT SOME $324   MILLION TO THE 64,000 EMPLOYEES   THAT WERE PART OF THIS CLASS   ACTION LAWSUIT.   IF IT HAD GONE TO TRIAL THEY   WERE EXPECTING TO ASK FOR AS   MUCH AS $3 BILLION.   SO THEY GOT A LOT LESS THAN THEY   MIGHT HAVE GOTTEN BUT THEY GOT   THE CERTAINTY OF SOME KIND OF A   SETTLEMENT AND SO THEY DON’T TO   GO TO TRIAL WHICH COULD HAVE   DRAGGED ON AND WHO KNOWS WHAT   HAPPENS WHEN YOU PUT IT BEFORE A   JURY.  >>WHAT CONCERNS BESIDES THE   FACT THAT THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN   A LONG TRIAL, WHAT CONCERNS DID   THE TECH COMPANIES — APPLE,   GOOGLE, INTEL — HAVE THAT MADE   THEM WANT TO SET?  >>ONCE YOU GO TO TRIAL AND YOU   HAVE DISCOVERY AND EVERYONE IS   ROOTING THROUGH YOUR FILES AND   E-MAILS, EMBARRASSING THINGS   COME OUT.   THERE WAS AN E-MAIL THAT   SURFACED FROM STEVE JOBS IN 2005   TO SERGEI BRYN AT GOOGLE   BASICALLY WARNING THEM “DON’T   YOU DARE GO AFTER THESE   EMPLOYEES OR IT WILL BE WAR.”   WHEN THAT COMES OUT SOME OF THE   LUSTER COMES OFF OF THESE   COMPANIES, THESE INNOVATIVE TECH   COMPANIES THAT HAVE SUCH GREAT   REPUTATIONS IN SOME CIRCLES.   SO I THINK THEY WANT TO AVOID   THAT AND MAKE THIS ALL GO AWAY.  >>WHAT IMPACT DO YOU THINK THIS   WILL HAVE ON SILICON VALLEY   COMPANIES?  >>THE EMPLOYEES IN QUESTION ARE   THE REALLY HIGH-DEMAND   PROGRAMMERS AND THOSE FOLKS SO   THEIR SALARIES ARE PROBABLY   GOING GO UP BECAUSE THERE WILL   BE BIDDING WARS TO GET THEM TO   COME WORK FOR ONE COMPANY OR   ANOTHER.   AND HEAD HUNTERS AND LAWYERS   WILL BENEFIT AS WELL.  >>>LET’S MOVE ON TO STATE   POLITICS BECAUSE DESPITE THE   RAIN WE’RE GETTING THIS WEEK,   GOVERNOR BROWN TODAY ISSUED A   DROUGHT EXECUTIVE ORDER.   WHAT DOES IT DO?  >>A LOT OF THINGS.   IT REITERATES THIS IS A BIG   PROBLEM.   IT ALSO WAIVES ENVIRONMENTAL   REGULATIONS WHICH IS A BIG DEAL   FOR FARMERS WHEN THERE’S WATER   TRANSFERS AND, OF COURSE, IT   CONCERNS ENVIRONMENTALISTS ANY   TIME YOU TALK ABOUT WAIVING THE   CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY   ACT.   BUT THE GOVERNOR KIND OF FELT,   OBVIOUSLY, THAT WAS THAT THAT   WAS IMPORTANT TO GET WATER WHERE   IT NEEDS TO GO WITHOUT RED TAPE.  >>ALSO THE GOVERNOR IS   CONCERNED ABOUT DROUGHT AND   CLIMATE CHANGE.   HE SPOKE WITH KQED THIS WEEK.   WHAT DID HE SAY ABOUT THAT?  >>HE HAD A LOT TO SAY ABOUT   CLIMATE CHANGE IN THE   ENVIRONMENT.   ONE OF THE THINGS WE ASKED HIM   ABOUT WAS THE KEYSTONE PIPELINE   WHICH PRESIDENT OBAMA IS   DELAYING A DECISION ON.   HERE’S WHAT HE HAD TO SAY ABOUT   THAT.  >>CALIFORNIA IS THE LEADER SO   WHATEVER OBAMA ENDS UP DOING ON   KEYSTONE, I’M COMMITTED TO   HAVING CALIFORNIA LEAD THE REST   OF THE NATION AND THE WORLD IN   REDUCING THE USE OF GASOLINE,   OIL, AND ALL THE OTHER PETROLEUM   PRODUCTS, METHANE AND ALL THE   REST OF IT SO WE DON’T DESTROY   THE FABRIC OF LIFE THAT WE ALL   DEPEND ON.  >>AND, OF COURSE, HE HAD MUCH   MORE TO SAY ABOUT A HOST OF   OTHER ISSUES AND WE’LL HAVE MORE   FROM HIS INTERVIEW NEXT WEEK.   THANK YOU, SCOTT.  >>YOU BET, THANK YOU.  >>>NEXT WEEK WE WILL HAVE MUCH   MORE FROM OUR IN-DEPTH INTERVIEW   WITH GOVERNOR BROWN, WE TALK TO   HIM ABOUT HIS LONG-TERM VISION   FOR CALIFORNIA AND WHY HE WANTS   TO SEEK AN UNPRECEDENTED FOURTH   TERM AS GOVERNOR.   FOR ALL OF KQED’S NEWS COVERAGE,   PLEASE GO TO KQEDNEWS.ORG.  >>I’M SCOTT SHAFER, THANKS FOR   JOINING US.  >>I’M THUY VU.   HAVE A GOOD NIGHT.  

, , , , , , ,

Post navigation

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *