medium

NEW YORK — More than half of the WNBA ‘s 180 players didn’t submit their ballots for All-Star starters ahead of this month’s game in Chicago, a person familiar with the balloting told the Associated Press on Friday.

The person spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the voting. It’s unclear why so many players didn’t cast their votes. However, the Sparks were one of the teams that didn’t have all of its players vote due to some operational errors.

“Players were sent ballots via email,” the Sparks said in a statement. “Some players indicated that they didn’t receive the email or weren’t aware of it until after the voting period had closed. That’s something we take responsibility for as an organization, and we’ll have a more robust process going forward.”

Fan vote accounts for 50% of the overall vote while players and a media panel each are 25%. It’s been that way since 2017.

New York Liberty guard Sabrina Ionescu said her team has never had an issue getting players to submit their ballots.

“We always vote. But I do think especially if they’re weighed as much as they are, like teams should be making sure that their players are voting like it is important. There should never just be a team that like, doesn’t get the ballot. …That’s something that every player should be getting the opportunity. And if the player doesn’t want to vote, then that’s on them.”

The league announced the All-Star starters on Thursday.

ESPN was the first to report the lack of ballots.

Like the media, each player is given a link to a voting site as well as an individual username and password. Those are supplied by the league to the teams who distribute them to the players.

Sparks guard Kelsey Plum was lower in the player balloting than she was from the media and fans. She is second in the WNBA in scoring, but has only played in a dozen games because of injuries. She was 12th among players votes after ranking sixth by the fans and fifth by media.

She finished seventh in the voting overall for the guards. Even if the Sparks had all voted, it wouldn’t have been a guarantee that Plum moved up to the top four spots. In the past, players have said that they have either voted for their entire team on the ballot or for friends or college teammates, which has led to some skewed results. Some do take it seriously and pick who they think are the best players.

Fever star Caitlin Clark finished 11th in player balloting. She was named an All-Star starter because she placed second in the fan vote and third in the media rankings.

Feinberg writes for the Associated Press.

Cut to a seedy alley behind a Chinese restaurant in Rome: A dozen mobsters menace a slight young man who suddenly pulls out a pair of nunchucks. He swings the traditional stick-and-chain weapons and makes quick work of his enemies, who fall one by one, groaning in pain.

The comedic, legendary action scene is from the 1972 film “The Way of the Dragon,” written, directed and starring Bruce Lee. The martial arts star was a trailblazer, allowing Asian Americans to see themselves represented in a strong, positive light on-screen.

And now he has secured a place in California history, becoming the first Chinese American in state history to have a day designated in his honor.

Lee was born in 1940 in San Francisco. His mother was of European descent and his father was a Cantonese opera star who was on tour in the city, affording his son birthright citizenship.

Lee grew up in Hong Kong, where he followed his father’s path as a performer, acting in more than a dozen films as a child and studying the close-quarters southern Chinese martial art Wing Chun.

On May 17, 1959, an 18-year-old Lee returned to San Francisco and eventually made his way to Hollywood. He went on to influence an industry that was at the time bereft of Asian American talent, and helped to popularize the genre of martial arts films and ignite Western interest in Hong Kong action cinema.

In recognition of his contributions, state Assemblymember Matt Haney (D-San Francisco) introduced a bill designating May 17 as “Bruce Lee Day” in California. The bill, signed into law Tuesday by Gov. Gavin Newsom, encourages schools and communities to honor Lee’s life and cultural impact.

Haney has described Lee as a “symbol of pride, resilience and possibility for generations who rarely saw themselves reflected with strength and dignity.”

Lee, who saw himself not only as an actor but also as a poet and philosopher, encountered repeated barriers. Up for the main role in the 1970s television series “Kung Fu,” for example, he was rejected in favor of white actor David Carradine.

In 2020, filmmaker Bao Nguyen sought to show how Lee dispelled anti-Asian sentiment and long-held stereotypes of emasculated Asian men in his ESPN documentary “Be Water.”

“The Asian male was the face of the enemy to many Americans,” Nguyen told The Times in 2020. “It was this vicious cycle of society reflecting media and culture, and media and culture reflecting society. There had to be some kind of intervention there and Bruce, in a way, was that intervention. He was the hero that we hadn’t seen before.”

Lee learned much about the systemic oppression that Black Americans faced from his first student, Jesse Glover, who had been a victim of police brutality.

And scholars have pointed out that, although his films had far-from-perfect politics, they touched on themes of fighting oppression. The 1971 movie “The Big Boss” showed Lee battling alongside laborers. “Fist of Fury” saw him opposing Japanese colonialism and discrimination.

Lee died young in 1973, at age 32 — before he was able to witness the full extent of his stardom. He died just one month before the release of “Enter the Dragon,” which was a box-office sensation and is considered a masterpiece of martial arts filmmaking.

Lupa Systems, the media and tech holding company owned by James Murdoch, is set to acquire nearly half of Vox Media.

As part of the deal, Murdoch’s company will own Vox Media’s podcast network, Vox.com and New York Magazine, once an asset of his father, industry giant Rupert Murdoch. Terms of the deal were not disclosed, but the price tag was reportedly over $300 million, the New York Times reported citing people familiar with the deal. The goal of the investment is to bring “influential journalists, top-rated podcasts, and digital brands with large social footprints” to Lupa and help grow its media portfolio, the company announced Wednesday.

“This acquisition aligns well with our existing holdings and investments and reflects both our interest in the forward edge of culture and our deep commitment to ambitious journalism and agenda-setting conversations,” Murdoch said in a statement.

The three new assets will function as a subsidiary of Lupa Systems and will keep the name Vox Media. The deal includes New York Magazine’s popular verticals like The Cut, Vulture and Intelligencer, as well as Vox’s most successful podcasts like “Today, Explained” and “Pivot with Kara Swisher and Scott Galloway.” Jim Bankoff, Vox Media’s current CEO, will continue to lead the company.

The other Vox Media properties, which Murdoch did not purchase, include websites like Eater, The Dodo and The Verge. These platforms will be run under an unnamed new company by the current president of Vox Media, Ryan Pauley.

This investment strengthens Lupa Systems’ position in the evolving media landscape. The business has other holdings including the parent company of Tribeca Film Festival, the owner of Art Basel, Robert DeNiro and Jane Rosenthal’s entertainment company Tribeca Enterprises, and Bodhi Tree Systems, an investment platform behind a popular Indian streaming service.

This is one of the largest deals Murdoch has closed since he and his family resolved a $3.3-billion dispute last year. The conflict centered on the future of the family’s media empire, which includes Fox News, The New York Post and The Wall Street Journal. In the settlement, James Murdoch received roughly $1 billion and his elder brother, Lachlan, assumed power over the family’s assets.

Before the legal blowout, Murdoch previously served as the chief executive of major global media companies like 21st Century Fox and Europe’s Sky Group.

The billionaire told the New York Times that, with this new acquisition, he didn’t want a “daily news business.” He wanted “longer-form, thoughtful journalism that can really speak to the culture.”

SACRAMENTO — The debate over immigration issues has reached a fever pitch nationwide, and Angelica Salas said it’s putting her employees at risk.

Salas, executive director of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, said her staff experiences harassment and death threats.

“They ask themselves, what if someone who disagrees with our work can find where I live, will my family be safe?” Salas said, addressing state lawmakers at a recent legislative hearing.”People begin to self-censor; they step away from their work and some leave the field entirely.”

Salas was speaking in support of Assembly Bill 2624, which would provide privacy protections for those facing harassment for working or volunteering with organizations that offer legal and humanitarian aid to immigrants. The bill would create an address confidentiality program, like the one already offered to reproductive healthcare workers, and prohibit people and businesses from selling or posting images or personal information about the protected individuals on the internet.

The measure has drawn ire from Republicans, who argue it could have a chilling effect on free speech and the media. Assemblymember Carl DeMaio (R-San Diego) dubbed it the “Stop Nick Shirley Act” and said it would prevent right-wing social media influencers like Shirley from conducting immigrant-related investigations in California.

Assemblymember Mia Bonta (D-Alameda), who authored the legislation, said the proposed law would help keep people safe — but several 1st Amendment experts this week told The Times the bill could have unintended consequences.

“There could be grounds for concern,” said Jason Shepard, a media law and communications professor at California State Fullerton. “It reflects a legitimate and important state interest in protecting people from harassment and threats. But at the same time, this bill punishes the publication of information.”

The legislation defines “personal information” as anything that identifies, describes or relates to the protected individuals, including their names, addresses, telephone numbers, physical descriptions, driver’s licenses, financial information, license plate numbers and places of employment.

Shepard said the potential new law could be applied unevenly, and the language could have a chilling effect on investigative journalism.

Given the polarized political environment, Shepard said the legislation also could prompt other groups to request similar protections, as those working in a range of professions are facing increasingly heated rhetoric or attacks.

“This is not unique to people who are working in immigration support services; this really could apply to anybody engaged in public debate today,” he said.

Carolyn Iodice, the policy director for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, known as FIRE, said the organization has noted an uptick in laws nationwide implementing privacy protections for those in certain professions.

She pointed to a statute enacted a few years ago in New Jersey that protects the addresses of judges, prosecutors and police officers. The law was used in 2023 to block an editor with New Brunswick Today from publishing an article about the police chief living two hours outside of the city.

“It was obviously newsworthy, but this officer was able to wield the law against this journalist, and that is the kind of thing we are worried about,” Iodice said. “When you think about handing what could be a huge number of people the ability to just block anything from being posted about them online — it could easily be abused.”

David Loy, the legal director for the nonpartisan First Amendment Coalition, said the measure would censor the free speech of all citizens, not just those who defamed or threatened immigrant aid workers.

“Someone might have a legitimate dispute with them and wants to refer to it online,” he said. “But they could then basically silence [that person] from referring to them on a Yelp review or Facebook posts that has nothing to do with threatening them — and that is going way beyond the narrow exceptions of the 1st Amendment.”

Loy said the coalition reached out to Bonta’s office and hopes to help tweak the bill.

Meanwhile, the legislation continues to face scrutiny from Republicans.

“We exposed CA Democrats for the ‘Stop Nick Shirley’ Act that silences citizen journalists who expose their fraud and corruption,” DiMaio wrote this week on social media.

Shirley released a viral video last year alleging fraud in Somali-run immigrant daycare centers in Minneapolis. He recently shared videos of himself in Sacramento confronting Democrats who support Bonta’s bill.

“The enemy is truly within,” Shirley wrote on Instagram. “When our politicians would rather protect fraudsters and illegal migrants, it’s time for us to stand up or face mass oppression from the traitors.”

Bonta dismissed the assertion that the bill is intended to deter journalists, stating in a news release that “right-wing agitators” and “ineffective legislators” were intentionally spreading misinformation.

Bonta spokesperson Daniel McGreevy said the bill has a straightforward goal of protecting immigrant service providers. He said the office is working to refine the legislation to address concerns and welcomes good-faith dialogue.

The bill is progressing through the state Legislature and most recently was referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee.