our guest today on whitney dialogues at the first amendment center has been andres serrano. i'm ken paulson, back next week with another conversation about the first amendment, the arts and america. i hope you can join us then for speaking freely. captioning provided by the first amendment center, funded by the freedom forum. captioning by captionmax www.captionmax.com

first amendment. they're expressing their religious beliefs. now is the time to make justice a reality for all of god's children. captioning provided by the first amendment center, funded by the freedom forum. welcome to speaking freely, a weekly conversation about free expression, the arts, and america. i'm ken paulson. since the founding of jefferson airplane in 1965, our guest has produced an extraordinary body of music, sometimes popular, sometimes provocative, sometimes both. we're delighted to welcome rock and roll hall of fame member paul kantner. [applause] not long ago, paul, the washington post called you "the political conscience and space cadet of the jefferson airplane." do you plead guilty as charged? oh, and more. were you really the political force behind a very political band? no, no, we're a very apolitical band, if you really analyze it. and--we have the luxury of coming from san francisco, which is very nutritious for off-the-beam, off-the-normal-beam kind of people and nurtures them, really, in its own way. and we, in contrast to, say, berkeley, for example, in the '60s or the s.d.s. or the weathermen, chose and got away with creating our o

first amendment. they're expressing their religious beliefs. now is the time to make justice a reality for all of god's children. captioning provided by the first amendment center, funded by the freedom forum. welcome to speaking freely. i'm ken paulson. our guest today has been both a pioneer and a driving force behind hip-hop. he's the founder of def jam records, chairman of rush communications. he's russell simmons. thanks for joining us here today. thank you for having me. i read very recently-- i think it was salon that described you as "not the inventor of rap but the man most responsible for its success." guilty as charged? well, i would say that i have been part of a process, that i don't--i don't believe it would have been a problem for it to spread without my input, but i was a part of the process, and it was--it's been an amazing ride over the last 20-some-odd years, and i've watched it evolve. you've got a fascinating new book called life and death: sex, drugs, money, and god, which covers pretty much everything there, and it tells the story-- not necessarily in that order. well, it tells the story of your career, including the first moment you hear

credibility -- our own survey at the first amendment center, the state of the first amendment, we asked certain questions every year. one of those questions is, concerning bias. two-thirds of the american public see bias in news reports. but almost the same number sees a role for the press as watchdog. if you just asked, is a free press important, if you get 95%. that seems at odds. how you deal with the issue ofbias? >> that is primarily what i dealt with at npr, being the public advocate for the listeners. explaining npr to the listeners, the listeners to npr. i came to learn that what we have is a very fractured media. people listen, read, watch the their own personal beliefs. so what they see as biased is that you are not on my side. you're not advocating for me. and that is not paroled the news media. i think it is a speech is complete. -- specious complaint. i got to complaints about a story. once said that it was national palestinian radio and the other said it was about pays for the israeli military. >> that is a diversity news media. a lot of people agree with the bias, you did

our own survey at the first amendment center, we do a survey every year called the state of the first amendment, and we ask certain questions every year since 1997. one of those is, concerns bias. and we've been consistently getting the last few years about two-thirds of the american public sees bias in news reports. now, at the same time almost that same number sees a role for the press as catch dog, and if you just -- watchdog, and if you just ask is a free press important, you get 95%. those sometimes seem at odds, but how do you all deal with the issue of bias? >> as the ombudsman at npr that's primarily what i dealt with in terms of what the job was to be the public advocate for the listeners, explain the listensers to npr. i came to learn what we have now is a very fractured media, and people really listen, read, watch through their own personal beliefs. and so what they see as bias is you're not on my side, you're not advocating for me. and that suspect the role of the nude -- that isn't the role of the news media. so i think it's a specious complaint. no matter, i mean, within

let me introduce you to the senior vice president at the first amendment center of the freedom forum.has an office here in washington d.c. and the first amendment center is one of the leading organization that works with judiciary and government on open access issues and councils journalists along the way. he has run panels like this and programs like this in conjunction with the organized federal judiciary. we look forward to your wisdom today. brooke harper has a very cool job. today, she is planning to court public information officer. also equal job. in her private life, she's a full-time blogger who runs a web site called the felony calendars. she has a law degree and has practiced both white-collar and civil defense law. she found it interesting spending time in court and thinks there are a lot of human and legal stories. she has put them together on a wonderful blog. i love the weekly feature where she recalls in an arbitrary and capricious way, the most arbitrary and capricious moments of the court in the past week. playing our national tv journalist is no stranger to most peo

gene is the senior vice president at the first amendment center of the freedom forum. he resides in nashville and has an office here in washington, d.c.. the and it's one of the leading organizations that works with judiciary and government on open access issues and counselors journalists along the way. and gene himself has run panels just like this and programs like this in conjunction with the organized federal judiciary. and so gene, we look forward to your wisdom -- pearls of wisdom here. next to gene is brooke. brooke has a cool job, she's playing a public information officers, also a cool job. but in your private life, in her real life brooke is a full-time blogger. brooke runs a website the felony calendars.com and is it singular plural. >> plural. >> i want to steer you to the right url. brooke has a law degree and has practiced both white collar and civil defense law and she found it real interesting spending time in court since there are a lot of human stories and legal stories and she's put them all together on a wonderful blog. my favorite is your weekly fe

it was fundamentally centered on my first amendment rights as an american to do so now what do you mean when you say reporter outside of the system you mean outside of washington d.c. outside of these so major publications that work closely with authorities by virtue of going to a reporter under the first amendment you know freedom of the press i was technically the ministry of oil lucian to do so in an authorized manner me if i did not have prior approval to have contact with a reporter in the free press that i was an administrative violation. i understand now just when i want to go over to you for a minute to because this case was going on there was a lot of media attention surrounding it and then suddenly we learned that all the charges were dropped that we were that the government was trying to get a plea bargain and you ended up with only one misdemeanor was unauthorized access to a computer what really happened here why did that suddenly go away well i think the government thought on many occasions that they could get tom drake to plead guilty and he always said from the get go i

because of a communication device that we consider our first amendment right. >> another bart protest is planned for 5:00 here tomorrow at civic center station. no answers yet on whether or not they will allow cell phone service, ann. >> we'll have a crew covering it. don knapp, thank you. >>> well, a teenage boy has been shot to death at an east bay birthday party. police say an argument at the party in antioch escalated into gunfire. a 6-year-old oakley boy was shot and later died at the hospital. a 17-year-old girl was also injured in the shooting. police have not released any information about the suspect. >>> checking other bay area headlines, san francisco police are searching for another hit and run driver who injured a child. the 5-year-old boy was struck yesterday at a crosswalk at silver avenue nearle myra. police are searching for a 1980s model dark hatchback with a missing passenger's side mirror. two and a half weeks ago, a 9-year-old boy visiting from pennsylvania was hit by a suspected drunk driver. >>> a woman struck and killed by a muni bus friday has been identified as 23-year-old emily dunn of san francisco. dunn w

um, jeff, the debate about wikileaks clearly centered on first amendment issues.and in that framework, um, when is it appropriate for the government to punish pub hi case of information both classified and unclassified related to national security, and when is it not? where is the, where is the balance there? >> the standards are drawn with exquisite precision, and this is the result of a hard-worn battle. there were a series of prosecutions during the post-world war i era where anarchists who advocated nothing more than general opposition to the war effort were prosecuted for their speech. and in a series of heroic dissenting opinions by oliver wendell holdment and louis -- holmes and louis brandeis, the supreme court said that, no, you need speech that poses an imminent threat of serious lawless action, and in this context usually that means the publication of troop movements or the death of soldiers. the espionage act itself which is controversial, it's not as if we should accept even its limited requirements, require that you know that you're leaking classifie

. >> the debate about wikileaks is clearly centered on first amendment issues. in that framework, when is it inappropriate for the government to punish publication of information of a but the classified and unclassified to security? >> the standards are drawn with this was a precision. this is the result of a hard one battle. there were a series of prosecutions during the post- world war ii one era were anarchists were prosecuted for their speech. the supreme court said the you need speech that poses an imminent threat of serious oawless action, the publication of true movement our debt of soldiers. it is controversial. it requires that you know that you are leaking classified security information and your intent to harm the government. efforts to invoke this act have been unsuccessful. scooter libby leaked this and was prosecuted for false statements because it would have been impossible to prove that he knew the information was classified and he intended to harm the government. the obama at evisceration try to prosecute an -- unsuccessfully tried to prosecute

sensibly about what the right way to respond would be. >> the debate about wikileaks clearly centered on first amendment issues. when is inappropriate for the government to publish classified bove classified- related national-security and one is it not? where is the balance? >> the standards are drawn with precision as a result of a heart warmed battle. there were serious prosecution's during the post- world war i ear were advocates were prosecuted and for their speech and a series of her road defending opinions by louis brandeis, who is the greatest predictor of privacy, who said union speech that poses an imminent threat of serious lawless action. in this context, that usually means the publication of truth movement for the death of soldiers. the espionage act is controversial. it's a limited requirements require that you know you are doing that and intent to harm the government of. package to revoke the act have been in consequence for. you will remember the scooter libya leak-- libby leak. it would have been nearly impossible to prove that he knew it was classified. more recently, the obama administ

first amendment to contract no. cs - 159 between the san francisco municipal transportation agency and the transbay joint powers authority for transbay transit center program services pursuant to charter section 9.118 in an amount not to exceed $3,280,677. supervisor chu: thank you. for this item, we have joy hoolihan from the mta. >> good afternoon, president, supervisors. for this amendment, basically, we are asking for an additional $997,000 for services over the course of the next five years. extending the contract for an additional 11.5 months over the regional contract amount. basically, it is for traffic calming, bus services, to keep the buses on schedule and on time, and we have already provided the services for the beginning of august of last year. we anticipate the amount of $189,000. if you have any other questions, please let me know. supervisor chu: thank you. i do have some questions, but i will reserve them until after the budget analysts report. >> the amount referenced is and the number that sfmta was provided in services and then would be reimbursed by the joint powers authority. we recommend you recommend the resolution to fund

first amendment to contract no. cs - 159 between the san francisco municipal transportation agency and the transbay joint powers authority for transbay transit center program services pursuant to charter section 9.118 in an amount not to exceed $3,280,677. supervisor chu: thank you. for this item, we have joy hoolihan from the mta. >> good afternoon, president, supervisors. for this amendment, basically, we are asking for an additional $997,000 for services over the courseof

first amendment right to know. >>> a small earthquake struck this morning near the montey san benito line. the u.s.g.s. says the quake was a 3.0 and centeredix miles northwest of the pin ilks. it was felt in salinas and san josi. there were no reports of any damage from either quake. >>> the final section of the new eastern span of the bay bridge is set to arrive from china tomorrow and add lighting. >>> cloud cover out there, but then the sun broke through and it's pretty nice. let's check in with mark tamayo. >> pretty nice day across most of the bay area and, in fact, a fairly nice weekend with temperatures warming up, especially away from the water. right now i can show you this on live stormtracker 2, fog tracker and some clearing near parts of the coastline, around san francisco, you can pick out around the golden gate bridge and even a few patches pushing back into the embankment transamerica building there, currently 61 degrees. 61 degrees fahrenheit, if you want to convert to celsius, swap the numbers, 16 degrees. it's the only temperature you can do that. just a random fact to share with you. 91 degrees in fairfield, livermore, 9

the story, though, starts and centers in san francisco where subway riders are asking, have my first amendment violated? you talk to the folks in the mass transit system. they're saying look, we're trying to keep the passengers safe. back and forth, getting more and more intense. take a look at the video here. protestors trying to disrupt service at several bart stations across san francisco. it's an acronym for the bay area rapid transit system. demonstrators are angry that bart officials decided to shut down cell service ahead of a protest last week. they're upset about shootings involving their own police officers and riders in the past. new today here, the federal government is investigating. in fact, take a look at what the fcc told us today. they say any time communication services are interrupted, we seek to assess the situation. we're continuing to collect information about bart's actions and will be taking steps to hear from stakeholders about the important issues those actions raised. protecting public safety and ensuring the availability of communications networks. yesterday, bart d

. >> the debate about wikileaks clearly centers on first amendment issues when is it appropriate for government to punish publications on classified and unclassified related to national security and where is it is not? where's the balance there. >> standards are with exquisite precision. there was a series of prosecutions during the post-world war i era where anarchists who advocated nothing more than general opposition to the war efforts were prosecuted for their speech. and in the series of heroic dissenting position by oliver wendell holmes and my hero oliver wendell price. the supreme court said, no, you need speeches that poses an imminent threat of action and the publication of movements. it's controversial it's not if we should accept its limited requirements that require you to know that you're leaking classified national security information and that you intend to harm the government at the same time. and efforts to invoke this act have just been remarkably unsuccessful. you'll remember that scooter libby leak prosecution and the reason scooter libby was prosecuted for false