ReportWire

Tag: letter

  • Outrage against Univision grows after Trump interview

    Outrage against Univision grows after Trump interview

    [ad_1]

    Univision has found itself at the center of a growing controversy after a recent interview with former President Trump that critics have blasted as too friendly.

    The interview that aired Nov. 9 was noticeably warm, and Trump received little pushback as he gave false or misleading statements on border security and immigration policies he instituted as president.

    Backlash from certain corners of the Latino community was swift, including calls for more balanced reporting and an outright boycott of the television network ahead of the 2024 election.

    Latinos are considered a crucial voting bloc — and largely up for grabs — in next year’s election, likely to be a rematch between Trump and President Biden. Although Latino voters have historically favored Democrats, the Republican Party in recent years has made significant progress in courting their votes.

    The exclusive interview with Trump therefore raised significant alarms within the Democratic Party and its allies that the leading Republican candidate was making unchecked claims to important swing voters.

    Actor John Leguizamo posted a video to his 1 million Instagram followers Thursday criticizing the Spanish-language media company for “softballing Trump” and reportedly canceling ads for Biden. He said the television network has become “MAGA-vision.”

    He implored fellow entertainers, athletes, activists and politicians to join him in boycotting the network until it reinstated “parity, and equality and equity” between the presidential candidates. The television network has also requested an interview with Biden, according to the Washington Post.

    The more-than-hourlong interview with Trump was conducted by Enrique Acevedo, an anchor from Mexican network Televisa who is not a Univision journalist. The two media groups merged last year. Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner reportedly helped organize the interview.

    “All you have to do is look at the owners of Univision,” Trump said in the first few minutes of the interview when asked about Latino voters and recent polls showing him defeating Biden in 2024. “They’re unbelievable entrepreneurial people, and they like me.”

    “They want to see security,” Trump added. “They want to have a border.”

    During the interview, Trump made questionable claims that the partial wall built along the southern border was made possible by Mexico providing thousands of soldiers “free of charge,” and that former President Obama laid the groundwork for the controversial policy at the border to deter illegal crossings that became known as the family-separation crisis. Acevedo did not push back on either claim.

    “It wasn’t just a friendly interview. It was an embarrassing 1-hour puff-piece with lots of smiles and no pushback with a guy who relished in attacking, belittling and otherizing Latinos and Latin American immigrants,” Ana Navarro-Cárdenas, a prominent Nicaraguan American political strategist and commentator, said on the platform X, the company formerly known as Twitter.

    León Krauze, a veteran news anchor for Univision, has since resigned from the network. He did not provide a reason for his departure.

    State Sen. Susan Rubio (D-Baldwin Park), a member of the California Latino Legislative Caucus who is running for Congress, said she knew many other Latino leaders who were “personally upset” about the interview.

    Rubio said she was “appalled” at how the former president “was allowed to just continue to spew lies and go unchecked” during the conversation. She called the interview “an insult to our entire Latino community.”

    The network is “absolutely influential” in households like hers, she said, describing it as a news source she and her Spanish-speaking parents view as trusted and unbiased.

    “Our community relies on this information to be truthful. They rely on this source that has been trusted by the Latino community for many, many generations,” she said. “They should have done a better job of making sure that our community is not lied to.”

    The Congressional Hispanic Caucus plans to send a letter to the television network requesting a meeting with its chief executive, Wade Davis, and calling for stronger guardrails against disinformation, according to a draft copy of the letter reviewed by The Times.

    More than 70 organizations — including prominent Latino groups such as the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, America’s Voice and the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights — signed an open letter to Davis and other TelevisaUnivision executives, sharply criticizing the interview.

    The letter, first reported by the Post, asks that the network “conduct a thorough internal review, take corrective measures, and reaffirm its commitment to unbiased reporting and to keeping the Latino community informed and up-to-date with facts and truth,” according to a copy reviewed by The Times.

    The controversy is more complicated than what it seems, said Mike Madrid, a GOP political consultant who has a forthcoming book called “The Latino Century: How America’s Largest Minority is Shaping Our Democracy.”

    Madrid, who is a vocal critic of Trump, said the objections to the interview are reflective of how the Democratic Party and other left-leaning organizations have taken Latino voters for granted — and relied on the television network to promote their candidates and policies for decades.

    Since the late 1980s, Democrats have banked on Latino voters to win elections, Madrid said. But over the last decade, Democrats have begun “hemorrhaging” second- and third-generation Latino voters who are U.S.-born and English-dominant speakers.

    Madrid doesn’t dispute that the interview with Trump may have been biased or too cozy, but he said it demonstrates the media company’s shift toward the middle and, therefore, a new Latino audience.

    “Where were they for the past 30 years when the Democratic Party was getting softball interviews? The Democrats have taken this base vote for granted. They assumed it was there and Univision would always be in their corner, would always be championing them and advocating for their candidates and policies,” he said. “When you’ve been the beneficiary of media bias, objectivity sounds like betrayal. That’s what’s going on.”

    Instead of promoting a boycott of the network, which Madrid called “absolute madness,” Democrats should adjust their strategy and start courting Latino voters on a variety of issues, such as the economy and jobs, rather than just immigration.

    “The Democrats have to figure this out very quick that going to war is not in their best interest,” he said. “They are going to have to learn to fight for this vote, when they haven’t for decades. … And they have less than a year to figure this out.”

    Times staff writer Stephen Battaglio contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Hannah Wiley, Julia Wick

    Source link

  • Staff walk out of Hollywood climbing gym, saying company kept shooting threat a secret

    Staff walk out of Hollywood climbing gym, saying company kept shooting threat a secret

    [ad_1]

    Employees at a popular Los Angeles rock climbing gym walked out after learning that management had not immediately disclosed a shooting threat and that they had worked in ignorance — and possible danger, they said — for days.

    According to an open letter posted by staff at Hollywood Boulders, one of five Touchstone Climbing gyms in Southern California, a gym member on Oct. 22 reported concerning text messages that they had received from another member. The letter did not repeat the messages in full but included phrases by the writer that they were “strapped” and “wanted scalps,” as well as a warning to the recipient to “avoid the gym for a while.”

    The texts went on to say the gym had “been way too lenient with all the wannabes here. no mas” and that the member “already has a kill order” and “god has spoken.” When the person who received the messages asked, “wdym stay away from the gym? Everything okay?”, the member replied, “i’ll know soon enough.”

    The Oct. 25 walkout coincidentally happened the same day as 18 people were killed in a mass shooting in Maine, which put people throughout the nation on edge as police hunted for the gunman, who was later found dead.

    “Mass shootings happen virtually every single day in this country,” the open letter states. “This is part of our new normal.”

    In a staffwide email sent Tuesday that was shared with The Times, company Chief Executive Mark Melvin said the threats were not found to be credible.

    Melvin said in the email that the threats were immediately reported to law enforcement, which determined they were not credible and told company officials to “take no further action and not to alarm our staff and community.”

    Although gym owners and upper management were informed of the threats, according to the open letter, staff members did not learn about them until Oct. 25. It is not clear from the letter how employees learned of the texts. Staff asked to see the messages but were unable to get them from management, the letter says, so they walked off the job, causing the gym to close early.

    The letter criticizes management’s decision to withhold the threats from staff, as well as the actions taken without input from staff.

    In his email to staff, Melvin said external security was hired at all five locations in Southern California, and the person who wrote the texts was banned from all gym locations.

    Melvin in his email emphasized that the text message threats never specified a location, that they were not deemed credible by law enforcement, that there was no active shooter present and that the messages were simply “personal communication” between two gym members.

    The gym remained closed Oct. 26 because of the walkout but reopened the following day, according to Melvin. Staff also began circulating a letter to gym members, encouraging them to freeze or cancel their memberships and to donate the funds to a GoFundMe fundraiser toward staff to make up for lost wages during the walkout.

    Hollywood Boulders management did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    “This is the first time we’ve experienced anything like this, and we know our response wasn’t perfect,” Melvin’s email concludes. “Given the tragic state of gun violence in our nation, we understand why some members of our community were alarmed to learn about some details of these events through various online channels.”

    [ad_2]

    Jeremy Childs

    Source link

  • Exxon scraps plan for new pipeline after 2015 spill — but may try to resurrect old one

    Exxon scraps plan for new pipeline after 2015 spill — but may try to resurrect old one

    [ad_1]

    Central Coast environmentalists are celebrating ExxonMobil’s recent decision to scrap plans to replace miles of pipeline through Santa Barbara County, key to revitalizing a local network of petroleum energy production shuttered since the catastrophic 2015 Refugio oil spill.

    But at the same time, the oil giant has raised fresh concerns, saying it is instead exploring the possibility of repairing existing, damaged pipeline.

    The years-long effort by oil companies to replace two major segments of pipeline could have allowed the company to restart offshore oil platforms along Santa Barbara County’s coast and an onshore processing plant. These possibilities have been long reviled by local environmental groups and some residents, especially after the catastrophic 2015 spill, which continues to loom large in the region.

    “This [pipeline] replacement has been hanging over the community’s head for five years now,” said Jonathan Ullman, director of the Sierra Club’s Santa Barbara-Ventura chapter. “I was very happy to hear this news; it felt like their withdrawal signified that the writing was on the wall that they could not continue.”

    Ullman said the construction project — had it been approved — had major implications for the environment, wildlife and public health, with heightened risks of oil spills and increased fossil fuel emissions.

    The 2015 spill, caused by “extensive” corrosion on a section of pipeline, hemorrhaged more than 140,000 gallons of crude oil along the Gaviota Coast, much of which ended up in the ocean and along the region’s prized coastline, closing Refugio and El Capitan state beaches for weeks and affecting countless seabirds and marine life. Oil heavily coated a stretch of Santa Barbara County’s coast, with small tar balls reaching as far south as Redondo Beach in Los Angeles County.

    Officials for Pacific Pipeline Co., a subsidiary of Texas-based ExxonMobil, wrote to Santa Barbara County leaders that it had found “the potential environmental impacts associated with the major construction of a second pipeline unnecessary and avoidable,” according to an Oct. 24 letter, withdrawing its proposal from the county’s permitting process.

    The letter, however, also opened the door for another complicated fight in Santa Barbara County, with Exxon officials announcing that the oil giant would change its focus from building replacement pipeline to trying to restore old, damaged pipeline.

    “Recent inspections and analysis affirms … the existing pipeline can be responsibly restarted,” the letter said. It also mentioned that during the replacement pipeline’s environmental review, “staff from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency indicated that restart of the existing pipeline is likely the Least Environmentally Damaging Practical Alternative under the Federal Clean Water Act.”

    Exxon officials did not release additional information about those reviews but clarified that any “formal decision on the [Least Environmentally Damaging Practical Alternative] cannot be made until the entire environmental review and permitting process is completed.”

    Exxon officials did not respond to questions from The Times requesting further details about such an undertaking, including any analysis of environmental impacts.

    “Pacific Pipeline Company and ExxonMobil have assets that we intend to leverage to deliver reliable energy to Californians and others,” Exxon spokesperson Julie King said in a statement.

    Kelsey Gerckens Buttitta, a spokesperson for Santa Barbara County, said Exxon and its subsidiaries do not have any current applications under review regarding the pipeline, noting that another recent proposal to upgrade multiple valves along the line was not approved this summer. However, any plans to restart the lines would fall under the jurisdiction of the California State Fire Marshal, she said, making it clear that county officials would still be paying attention.

    “The County does have concerns with the integrity of restarting the existing pipeline but we are confident in the California State Fire Marshall’s ability to ensure that these concerns are addressed through their review authority,” Buttitta said in a statement.

    Environmental groups also shared overwhelming concerns about Exxon’s portrayal of restoring the existing pipeline, which was found to be heavily corroded in 2015.

    “At this stage of the climate crisis, building new oil infrastructure is reckless, to say the least,” said Maggie Hall, deputy chief counsel at the Environmental Defense Center, a nonprofit law firm that advocates for environmental protection in Santa Barbara, Ventura and San Luis Obispo counties.

    “However, restarting a corroded and compromised pipeline that already caused one massive oil spill is even worse,” she said in a statement. “There is no way for the pipeline owners to credibly claim it will be safe. If this pipeline is allowed to restart, it’s not a question of if, but when, it will be responsible for another catastrophe.”

    Ullman said he is hopeful that Exxon continuing to show interest in further construction in Santa Barbara County is simply a ploy by the company to keep investors interested, because he doesn’t believe such a plan could be successful.

    “That pipeline cannot be repaired,” Ullman said. “It must be abandoned for the safety of the people who travel on the Gaviota Coast, but also for the massive amount of wildlife and sea life that’s there now.”

    The ruptured pipeline that created the 2015 spill was built in 1987 and extended about 11 miles along the Gaviota Coast. It is part of a larger oil transport network that expands into Kern County, which Exxon had hoped to rebuild almost entirely, for a total of more than 120 miles through Santa Barbara County.

    With the replacement project now halted, Ullman hopes to see the existing lines — still not in operation — removed.

    “We’re still dealing with the consequences and the threats,” Ullman said. “The Gaviota Coast is really a special place … and worth protecting.”

    [ad_2]

    Grace Toohey

    Source link

  • Iowa State Fair cuts vendors over fraud concerns

    Iowa State Fair cuts vendors over fraud concerns

    [ad_1]

    Dad’s Old Fashioned Lemonade lost the spot at the Iowa State Fair it has called home for 73 years.The Iowa State Fair sent Dad’s Old Fashioned Lemonade and three other vendors a letter informing them they would not be offered a future contract to do business. The Iowa State Fair sent the following statement to KCCI:”The Iowa Department of Revenue made the Fair aware of fraud taking place during the 2022 Iowa State fair by concessions operators.”Dad’s Old Fashioned Lemonade is one of the four accused.”We were audited last year. They tried saying we were not claiming all of our funds. But we were. And we proved that we were,” said Diane Perry, Owner Dad’s Old Fashioned Lemonade.Perry thought everything had been worked out.She suspects there are other reasons the fair is waving goodbye to her lemonade stand.”And I could be totally wrong. But we just didn’t make enough money for the fair board,” Perry said.She knows her days selling lemonade at the fair are over; something her family has done for five generations since 1948.”It means everything. It’s a family tradition. We love doing it because it’s what we’ve done for so many years,” Perry said.Fair officials have not released the names of the other three vendors.

    Dad’s Old Fashioned Lemonade lost the spot at the Iowa State Fair it has called home for 73 years.

    The Iowa State Fair sent Dad’s Old Fashioned Lemonade and three other vendors a letter informing them they would not be offered a future contract to do business.

    The Iowa State Fair sent the following statement to KCCI:

    “The Iowa Department of Revenue made the Fair aware of fraud taking place during the 2022 Iowa State fair by concessions operators.”

    Dad’s Old Fashioned Lemonade is one of the four accused.

    “We were audited last year. They tried saying we were not claiming all of our funds. But we were. And we proved that we were,” said Diane Perry, Owner Dad’s Old Fashioned Lemonade.

    Perry thought everything had been worked out.

    She suspects there are other reasons the fair is waving goodbye to her lemonade stand.

    “And I could be totally wrong. But we just didn’t make enough money for the fair board,” Perry said.

    She knows her days selling lemonade at the fair are over; something her family has done for five generations since 1948.

    “It means everything. It’s a family tradition. We love doing it because it’s what we’ve done for so many years,” Perry said.

    Fair officials have not released the names of the other three vendors.

    [ad_2]

    Source link