The screen grab above is of a much younger me covering the Los Angeles riots 20 years ago this week. I remember the scene like it was yesterday. I was a reporter for KCAL-TV and I was standing near Wilshire and La Brea with videographer David Cronshaw. A building was on fire and we were broadcasting live on Channel 9 as a bucket brigade of Angelenos was trying to put out the fire one bucket at a time. One guy had jumped off his moped wearing a blazer and a helmet and he'd gone right to work wearing both. Eventually, a fire truck arrived and a hose line was deployed and these private citizens stood shoulder to shoulder with the firefighters to man that line. It is my best memory of the Los Angeles riots because it gave me hope after many sleepless hours covering a city on fire, in conflict, and out of control.

If you're too young to have any memories of the riots, it may seem like hyperbole to say the city was on fire, but it was. I experienced it firsthand. Over the course of 72 hours or so, I covered countless fires and scenes of looting and shooting from South Los Angeles to Pico-Union to Hollywood Boulevard. In Hollywood, I reported live on fires and looting in and around of all places Frederick's of Hollywood. I watched as many businesses burned. I reported in fear as mobs stormed around me to loot stores. At moments, I wondered if we were going to be attacked or shot. We fled from gunfire. At one point, we sped down an empty Wilshire Boulevard along a ghost town Miracle Mile at 70 miles per hour.

While the riots began as an explosion of anger over the not guilty verdicts in the trial of four LAPD officers in the videotaped beating of Rodney King, it eventually became an eruption of discontent, resentment and rage about the way minorities were treated in LA, about the massive gap between rich and poor, about the lack of good jobs and quality education for many residents of our city and other communities, and about injustices and humiliations that those who've never faced them could probably never understand. And then, there were the opportunists. There were those who exploited the moment to simply steal. They saw looting amidst a lack of police intervention and saw an opportunity to steal a TV or a pack of Pampers or a case of beer. They found an opportunity to vent their rage through violence on innocent people who happened to stray into their path. They found an opportunity to tear down the hard work of people who had spent years to build those businesses that they were now looting and torching.

In the 20 years that have passed since those terrible days and nights, I believe we've shown as a city that Los Angeles is not about the people who tried to burn it down. I choose to believe we're the city of Angels I saw on that bucket brigade handing the buckets from person to person to put out the fire.

A year ago today, I was preparing to embark upon a journey to Japan with my colleagues Toni Molle and Mike McGregor to cover the horrific aftermath of the 9.0 magnitude earthquake and tsunami that struck northeast coast of Japan.

In the few short days we were in Japan and in the few hours we were in and around Sendai, I saw destruction like I'd never seen in my 25 years of reporting and I experienced a fear I never imagined I would--the fear that we might become the victims of radiation poisoning. 

Years of training and experience covering disasters and crime and war prepared me to handle the coverage part of things. One switches off as much emotion as possible to try to focus on the tasks at hand. Fellow reporters, first-responders, emergency room doctors and nurses, and others who have had to work amidst a disaster know what I'm talking about. You don't have time to soak in the tragedy of what you're seeing. You just work. You process the emotions later.

But the emotions you feel and attempt to set aside are still within you. Sometimes they emerge without warning months or even years later. Such was the case last weekend when I attended a performance at the Ahmanson Theater sponsored by The Japan Foundation and Consulate-General of Japan in Los Angeles. They called it "Overcoming the Disaster: Arigato from Japan." Arigato is the Japanese word for thanks. It was a free concert and the kick-off to an international concert tour of top Japanese performers aimed at thanking the world for coming to Japan's aid last March.

There were wonderful cultural and musical performances. And, this video which was as powerful as anything I've seen in the year since the Great East Japan Earthquake shook Japan on 3/11/11. 

As I watched this video in the darkened theater with my wife and sons at my side, I suddenly felt a surge of emotion. Try as I might, I couldn't stop the tears from flowing. The video reminded me of the pain, the death, the destruction, and the loss experienced by the Japanese people. But it also did something else. The video showed me that Japan is moving forward and rebuilding. In the video, we were reminded of the legendary strength and grace of the Japanese people. Despite losing everything--their homes, their loved ones, their communities--they were saying: Thank You. Arigato. They were thanking all of us for our efforts to help them. It was moving.

I'm sure my personal connection to Japan plays into it for me. As some of you know, my mother is Japanese and I lived in Japan for six years as a boy. I've tried to stay connected to Japan and I'm a member of a people-to-people diplomacy organization of Japanese Americans called the US-Japan Council. We'll have the leader of the USJC, Irene Hirano Inouye, on our program Monday. One thing I know from my involvement in this organization is that Japan is trying to get out the word that as you see these images of destruction and you relive the horror of 3/11/11, that you remember that it's 3/11/12.

That is, that many of the images you are seeing are a year old. We in the news media tend to show you the most dramatic video and pictures of any story and among those are the ones that we have from the day the tsunami roared through the villages and communities along the northeastern coast of Japan.

The Japanese want us to know they've come a long way since we first showed you those pictures. Yes, there is much work to do in the disaster zones. But at the expense of sounding like a rep for the Japanese Chamber of Commerce, they also want us to know this: Japan is safe. Japan is open for business. Japan wants you to visit. And most importantly, Japan is grateful.

It's a cliche in TV sports coverage to ask viewers to be the umpire or referee after watching the slow motion highlight of a close tag at the plate or a pass caught at the sideline: "YOU make the call!" the sports anchor will say. This week, there was unfortunate collision of sports cliches when a basketball commentator on ESPN used the cliched phrase "chink in the armor" as he talked about New York Knicks sensation Jeremy Lin (an American of Taiwanese descent) and when ESPN's mobile website used the same phrase as a headline in describing Jeremy Lin's nine turnovers in a Knicks loss to the Hornets. 

So to quote the cliche: "You make the call!" Was ESPN completely oblivious to the fact that it might be offensive to use a loaded and racist word in the otherwise cliched phrase "chink in the armor?" Or is this a case of racism? 

My hope is this was, as my-father-in-law once told me in a different context, "the kind of a mistake any fool could make." In other words, it was just some guy at ESPN who made a foolish mistake. But my fear is the headline writer is a fool who thought he was being clever. 

 For those who may not know, the word "chink" is defined by FreeDictionary.com as a word "Used as a disparaging term for (a) person of Chinese birth or descent." "Chink in one's armor" is defined as "a small but fatal weakness."

In the interest of full disclosure, I'm an American of Asian descent myself (my mom is Japanese) and I'm a big fan of Jeremy Lin. Like many Americans of Asian descent (and many basketball fans in general), I'm proud of him. The D-1 schools ignored him when he was one of California's top high school basketball players. The NBA scouts dissed him when he was tearing it up on Harvard's basketball team. He's one of only a handful of Asian American men in the history of the NBA to play at that level. There's a lot of pride when he takes to the floor. So perhaps I'm a little more sensitive than the average person when it comes to how Asians are portrayed in the media and that's why this incident has caught my attention.

In my defense though, it's my job to be sensitive about how EVERYONE is portrayed in the media. I need to be careful not to perpetuate negative stereotypes and not to use words or phrases that could be construed as racist or derogatory when describing people. I have to be sensitive without being so sensitive that people can't express themselves freely. In some cases, it's a fine line. In others, it's obvious where the line is drawn. Knowing where the line is, is part of being a professional. When we get it wrong (and all of us probably will at some point in our careers), it's part of our professional responsibility to set the record straight and to apologize appropriately. The folks at ESPN share those responsibilities and the company's response to the upset caused by their headline at least suggests they get it.

Here's the statement from ESPN Director of Communication Kevin Ota:

Last night, ESPN.com's mobile web site posted an offensive headline referencing Jeremy Lin at 2:30 am ET. The headline was removed at 3:05 am ET. We are conducting a complete review of our cross-platform editorial procedures and are determining appropriate disciplinary action to ensure this does not happen again. We regret and apologize for this mistake.

And here's what ESPN said about the on-air use of "chink in the armor:"

Wednesday night on ESPNEWS, an anchor used an inappropriate word in asking a question about Jeremy Lin. ESPN apologizes for the incident, and is taking steps to avoid this in the future.

The Jeremy Lin story isn't a story that's just for basketball fans or Asian Americans. It's just a great story. It's about a guy who worked hard, refused to take no for an answer, caught some breaks, and is making the most of an opportunity that's come his way. His is a story we should all celebrate and it's one we can tell without resorting to cliche and certainly one we can tell without using words and phrases that are disparaging or hurtful.

First, a bit of disclosure: I know John King. John King is a friend of mine. Mr. Gingrich, you're no John King.

Political junkies will know I'm mashing together a vintage political debate line (Google Dan Quayle, Lloyd Bentsen and Jack Kennedy) with the two men who were at the center of last night's debate in South Carolina. Why? Because I think the King-Gingrich exchange will become just as famous.

By the way, I do know John King. John actually is a friend of mine. And I believe John King is one of the best political reporters in the nation.That's why when King (@johnkingCNN) asked Gingrich about allegations from Gingrich's second wife that at one time the former House Speaker wanted to be in an "open marriage" with the speaker's mistress, I was not surprised. In fact, I and every working reporter in America would would have accused John of malpractice if he HADN'T asked the question.

Some of you won't believe this but here's the truth: John didn't ask the question out of prurient interest. He asked the question because it was a major topic of discussion in the campaign coverage and because he had a responsibility to raise it. You can hear his explanation in his own words in the video. I hope you'll also listen to David Gergen's comments on the matter following John's explanation. Gergen is a highly respected political observer who has been an adviser to four U.S. presidents--Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Clinton--and he agrees that King had to ask the question.

I personally don't judge people when it comes to matters of the heart. But some people do. Newt Gingrich certainly seemed to when he led the impeachment proceedings against President Bill Clinton after it was revealed that President Clinton had lied about an affair with intern Monica Lewinsky. We learned later that Mr. Gingrich was having his own extramarital affair even as he was trumpeting the importance of marriage and family values. Mr. Gingrich's opponents say that's an example of hypocrisy. Mr. Gingrich's supporters say it's old news and it's none of our business.

Again, it's not for me to decide. It's for you to decide if that sort of information matters. But how could you even consider the information if it wasn't for journalists like John King who are willing to stand there and get booed for asking a question about a topic that was on every news channel and in every newspaper this week. Some will say it's an example of the "liberal" news media going after a "conservative" republican. Did those people say the same when reporters were going after democrats Gary Hart and Bill Clinton?

For journalists in the Hart, Clinton and Gingrich examples, it was and is about trying to make politicians accountable. In all the years I've worked in both the national news media and in local news, I've never been told to slant the news to favor liberals or conservatives. I have been asked to try to determine if a politician is telling the truth. I have also been charged with trying to determine who these candidates are so that you can decide if they're the right people to lead and govern our nation.

It's easy to beat up on the news media and I agree there's plenty to criticize. But in this case, John King doesn't deserve it. He was just doing his job.

I've been thinking a lot about that line in the Shawshank Redemption: "I guess it comes down to a simple choice really. Get busy living or get busy dying." The past year was one of the best years of my life and one of the worst but throughout it, I've been trying my best to "get busy living." There were many high points. Most of them involved time spent with family and friends or watching my sons grow as students and athletes and human beings. I enjoyed so many moments on the KTLA Morning News and you made us #1 again. I am grateful to a have a wonderful wife and a wonderful life. But it isn't a life without challenges and setbacks and pain.

The low point was losing my dad in April. He was a wonderful father and I'd looked forward to many more good times ahead. He was a true "gentle man" but also as tough as nails. Lung cancer was stronger though and he passed before we could take that golf trip to Ireland or Scotland or to Pebble Beach we'd talked about so many times. It's one of those regrets that I suppose all of us experience. We let time pass and we don't do the things we think about or talk about doing someday. I want to thank you all again for your support, your cards, your emails and your donations to the City of Hope through those most difficult of days.

Losing my dad made me think about my own life and made me ask myself questions about whether I was living my life to the fullest. It made me realize more than ever that our time on this earth is short. We need to make the most of it. We need to tell the people that we love that we do. We need to help our fellow man. We need to follow our dreams. I've always dreamed, for example, of starting my own business. I've had ideas of various kinds but like many people, I didn't do anything about them. I have a great "day job" afterall, and what do I know about business?

But over the past year, there had been one idea that I hadn't been able to get out of my head (no, it's not the Passenger Strap!) and so a few months ago, I went to a friend with some expertise in that world and asked him if he would partner with me. He agreed to join me and so we've spent the past few months developing the business. We'll launch it in the coming year. I can't say much about it now and I'm not sure how active I'll be able to be in the business because of my role as a news anchor, but I can tell you that if it all works out, you'll benefit from our service every time you go to the movies.

We may succeed or we may fail but for me, it's all about "getting busy living." How about you? As you reflect on the past year and look forward to 2012, are you "getting busy living or getting busy dying?" I wish you the very best in the new year.

Last week, a friend called to ask a favor: Would I be willing to speak to a fellow dad whose 13-year-old son was just diagnosed with type 1 diabetes? Of course I was and I immediately reached out because I know what it's like to have your life upended by such a diagnosis. It happened to my family nearly three years ago.

We were lucky. My son Ben didn't have to be hospitalized like many young people are when they're first diagnosed. Their parents often miss the typical symptoms of type 1 diabetes like extreme thirst, frequent urination, or sudden weight loss and they only realize something is terribly wrong when their child becomes terribly ill. They realize their child has type 1 diabetes in the emergency room. Most of them don't recognize the symptoms because they've never had to deal with type 1 diabetes. They don't have a family history. We didn't either.

With my son, the diagnosis came after an annual physical and a check of his blood and urine. Our pediatrician called to tell us the news. At first we didn't believe it. Our son is athletic. He's fit. He has a well-balanced diet. Isn't diabetes a disease that comes from overeating or a lack of exercise? Turns out type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes are very different diseases and type 1 (commonly referred to as juvenile diabetes) has nothing to do with diet or exercise. Researchers believe genetic factors and environmental triggers play roles in causing type 1 but the truth is they're still trying to figure out just why some people get it and others don't. The truth is it could happen to you. Every hour in this country, three people are diagnosed with type 1 diabetes.

When we learned that our son had it, fear, panic and a sense of helplessness were among the things we experienced. Every instinct to protect our child from harm kicked in. But if you're someone who has no familiarity with type 1 diabetes (which is the case with most new on-set patients and their families) you're suddenly gripped with panic because you realize you don't have the knowledge you need to keep your child alive. The doctors inform you immediately that that's how serious this disease is. Without insulin and proper management of your child's blood sugar levels, they tell you, your child can die.

There's nothing that compares to hearing something like that. My wife and I couldn't talk about the diagnosis for months without crying. The doctors who told us our baby boy had 10 fingers and 10 toes with everything in the right place when he was born were now telling us something had gone very wrong inside his body. His pancreas was not able to make the insulin we all need to get energy from food. For the rest of Ben's life, we learned, he would have to prick his finger several times a day to check his blood sugar level. And for the rest of his life, he would have to either inject himself with insulin or use an insulin pump before he eats or drinks. 

My wife and I would give anything to trade places with our son. Ben has been such a hero through all of it. When we talk to other parents of type 1 kids, they say the same. We live in awe of our children who manage the complex math, the pain, the complications and the hassles of life with type 1 diabetes as challenges to overcome--not as obstacles that might stop them in their paths. Ben continues to have a rich life full of friends, family, fun, sports and everything else that a 14-year-old enjoys. We couldn't be more proud of him. 

Nearly three years after his diagnosis, my wife and I can even talk about these things without being overcome with emotion. I think the JDRF Walk to Cure Diabetes has helped to empower us because we know we're actually doing something about type 1 diabetes. I sincerely believe Ben and the three million Americans with type 1 diabetes will someday live without the pin pricks, the injections and the insulin pump. Technology and science are on our side and we're going to cure this disease and every donation that's going to JDRF is helping us to get there.

I want to thank all of you who've donated to Team KTLA BB (Ben Buckley). It's not too late, by the way, to join our team for Sunday's walk or to send us a donation. Just go to ktla.com/jdrf and you can join us on Walk Day as part of Team KTLA BB!

I want to thank KTLA and my colleagues for supporting this effort. Stephanie Rodriguez, Erin Dunphy, Jeremy Horowitz, Claudine Sarmiento, Leila Shalhoub, Pavlos Rozis, Kerry Brace and Janet Hill and Jason Ball were among the folks who went over and above to make this happen. 

I also want to thank the role models living with type 1 diabetes who've come on the KTLA Morning News to raise awareness and to show our kids that they can achieve their goals whatever they are. They show us everyday that type 1 diabetes will not stand in their way. Thanks to Olympic gold medalist Gary Hall Jr., NFL player Matt Ware, American Idol runner-up and singer Elliott Yamin (on the show today), and Team Type 1 marathoner Eric Tozer who came on the show before beginning his run across America to raise awareness.

That friend of a friend whose son was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes knows he has my support and when he walks with us on Sunday and sees the thousands of people walking he'll know he's joined a community of support. If you'd like to be part of that community, join us. Register online with Team KTLA BB at ktla.com/jdrf. Or if you want to register on Walk Day, it begins this Sunday, November 6th at Dodger Stadium at 8AM. The actual walk begins at 11. In between, we're going to have food trucks and entertainment and a climbing wall and inflatables for the kids. We're going to have fun. Walk with me and let's cure type 1 diabetes together.

A few months ago, I had the pleasure of reading a first-draft of a script for Leonardo DiCaprio's production company and for Warner Brothers from a red-hot writer-director named JC Chandor. "Portofino" is an international thriller. It's the kind of film I love watching. I'll especially enjoy watching this one when it's eventually produced because it's based on a story I "pitched" to the studio and later wrote up as a treatment. And given the setting at which I sold this story--"pitching" is the appropriate word as you'll learn in just a moment.

But first, a confession. For years, I've had a secret hobby of sorts--coming up with ideas for films and TV programs. It was a secret because it's just so cliche for non professional screenwriters to tote screenplays and treatments around Hollywood hoping someone will buy them. I did the writing and thinking but didn't do the pitching. I have many friends who do it professionally and/or work in executive positions at studios and I suppose I could have shared my writing and my ideas with them. But it always seemed a bit unseemly to try to capitalize on those friendships and worse--it would have put friends in the awkward position of having to field pitches from an amateur. So I'm glad that it was an absolutely organic moment when I decided to run this particular idea by a big shot studio executive friend who ultimately made it all happen.

Greg Silverman is the friend. Greg's a busy executive and one of the top guys at Warner Bros (credited with being the point man on films like The Hangover, Dark Knight, 300 and others) so even at a Dodgers game, he's having to work. As he was fielding emails and texts between hits and runs at Dodger Stadium, Greg at one point mentioned he was talking to his bosses about a film involving CGI. That's computer generated imagery--the sort of technology that allows filmmakers to put an actor in a make-believe environment when he's really just standing in front of a green screen. "I have an idea for a film involving CGI," I suddenly blurted out. It was the first time I'd ever said a word to Greg about my secret hobby and I immediately wondered if I'd crossed an inappropriate line in our friendship. But Greg--probably quite used to friends doing this sort of thing--invited me to tell him my story. So I did.

The story behind "Portofino" the film begins on the Italian Riviera in the summer of 2003. My wife and I were in Portofino for the afternoon to celebrate her birthday. Portofino is a beautiful seaside village popular with tourists and the super rich. Tourists arrive via ferry. The super rich arrive via super deluxe yachts. Needless to say Elena and I arrived via ferry but as we sat at an outdoor cafe, I spied a group of older men who had apparently arrived aboard one of those yachts. I don't know that they did. I just knew they looked like wealthy men enjoying the good life. But they had an edge about them. I couldn't quite put my finger on it but they looked like they could be aging rockers or...aging bank robbers, I imagined. What if they were bank robbers who'd gotten away with a big heist some 25 years earlier and had been living the good life abroad? What if those men were now beginning to run out of money and were coming together to plan one last big heist? And what if those older fellows were stars like Jack Nicholson, Gene Hackman, Clint Eastwood and Robert DeNiro? Would it be possible, I asked Greg, to CGI footage of those stars as younger men, into a bank robbery sequence that put them all together in a scene as if we really had footage of such a scene from 25 years ago? Is the CGI advanced enough to create that scene? I asked Greg. His answer: "Absolutely." He asked me to continue my story.

The hero, I said, would be a young cop--maybe an Interpol investigator whose father was killed during that bank robbery some 25 years earlier. His job--to get the bad guys. His mission in life--to find and bring to justice the men who killed his dad and got away with it. The film would tell the story through our hero's eyes after he learned the men were in Italy. "I love the story," Greg said. "What should I do with it?" I asked. Greg explained that it might be tough to get it in front of the right people because I don't have a track record as a writer or a producer. But Greg promised to share my story with a couple of people. "I'll get back to you and let you know what they think," he said.

I immediately regretted all of it. Greg was being polite, I thought. I wished I hadn't opened my big mouth. But then, two days later, Greg rang me on the phone. "What's your email address?" he said. "I have something you'll want to see." Boy did I.

Greg had talked about my idea with Leonardo DiCaprio's producing partners. They too liked the pitch and that was that. Warner Bros wanted to buy it. I got a check and I was promised a credit in the film. Hollywood is easy, right? Not exactly. That was a couple of years ago. As those of you in the film business know, only a tiny percentage of films "in development" ever get made and Leonardo DiCaprio is one of the best actors and producers in the film business. He can choose from a slate of great scripts and projects.

But this weekend, the guy who wrote the screenplay for "Portofino" is the toast of the town. "Margin Call" was written and directed by JC Chandor and he's being interviewed everywhere and getting great reviews for his new film. Will that result in a renewed interest in "Portofino?" I sure hope so because what I really want to do is...produce.

These are the prices for items being sold today at an "Increase Diversity Bake Sale" sponsored by the Berkeley College Republicans at the University of California, Berkeley. Racist? "We agree the event is inherently racist, but that is the point," says Shawn Lewis, the president of the Berkeley Republicans. The point of the provocative bake sale? "It is no more racist than giving an individual an advantage in college admissions based soley on their race (or) gender."

The bake sale is an attempt to focus attention on SB 185, a bill that would allow our state universities to consider race, gender, ethnicity and national origin during the admissions process. The Berkeley GOPers decided to hold the bake sale after the UC Berkeley student government group--Associated Students of the University of California--endorsed the legislation and said it would sponsor a phone bank to encourage students to call Governor Jerry Brown to support it.

The bake sale has generated a considerable amount of controversy with some saying it will make some students feel unwelcome or uncomfortable on campus. In response, the student government passed a resolution at an emergency meeting that "condemns the use of discrimination whether it is in satire or in seriousness by an student group."

What are your thoughts? Is this a clever way to make us confront an issue or an insensitive approach that should be condemned or even banned from a campus?

Viewer Thomas Sandoval recently sent a series of angry tweets to my Twitter account @ktlafbuckley complaining that KTLA didn't provide any coverage of the Medal of Honor ceremony last week for Dakota Meyer, a young Marine credited with saving 36 lives during a Taliban ambush in September of 2009. Meyer was a 21-year-old corporal who defied orders and repeatedly drove into the "killing zone" in an attempt to rescue fellow Marines and others who were pinned down. Even though Meyer "knew" he was going to die, as he put it, the then corporal kept going. Last week, he became the third living recipient and the first Marine to receive the medal for actions in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Surely, Mr. Sandoval was wrong, I thought, and I told him he wasn't being fair. But I wanted to make sure we had given this story the attention it deserved so I did some investigating. It turns out, we didn't. While we did provide some coverage on our 10PM broadcast, it was not covered on our other newscasts. I'm told we didn't get the video in time for one broadcast and then breaking news got in the way of another--squeezing the time available to fit all of the stories planned for the broadcast. These are the kinds of decisions producers have to make in real-time every day and they're never easy. But as someone who spent my childhood on military bases and whose late father served with Marines as a hospital corpsman, it pained me to know we hadn't given this story its due.

So while this can't make up for it, here's the entire White House ceremony along with some links to more information.

Here's a link to the official Marine Corps site on Meyer's Medal of Honor: http://www.marines.mil/community/Pages/MedalofHonorSgtDakotaMeyer-citation.aspx.

And last night, 60 Minutes did an incredible job of telling this story of heroism with a critical view of the officers who denied air support that might have saved lives on that fateful day. Here's a link to David Martin's story: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/09/18/60minutes/main20107640.shtml?tag=contentMain;cbsCarousel

I hope you'll take the time to read the information and watch the video or David Martin's story on 60 Minutes. It's the least we can all do to honor this heroic Marine and those soldiers and Marines who didn't make it home.

A few years ago, I was asked to testify before the Department of Homeland Security Advisory Council Future of Terrorism Task Force as the "subject matter expert" on the news media. The task force was chaired by Lee Hamilton, vice chairman of the 9/11 Commission and members were asked to assess future threats to the U.S. and to recommend ways to better engage and prepare the American public for those threats. Most of those testifying were law enforcement or counterterrorism experts like then LAPD Chief William Bratton and intelligence officers from Department of Homeland Security, from the State Department and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. I was the only news media representative among the experts so I felt a special responsibility to convey the importance of keeping the public informed in a useful way.

These were the days of color-coded threat levels and I testified that most people didn't know the difference between the various colors. It wasn't working. I said Department of Homeland Security and other government departments and agencies needed to do a better job of telling us in the news media what was happening so that we could then properly inform our readers, listeners and viewers. I asked that policy makers treat us like adults and give us as much information as possible so that we as citizens could make decisions on how to conduct our lives in the manner we saw fit when a threat was deemed credible enough to publicize.

When the task force issued its report on January 11, 2007, I was pleased to see among the 14 recommendations this one:

"The Department should partner with the media and educational institutions to engage the public in prevention and response efforts--developing consistent, accurate, realistic, persuasive and actionable messages as well as evidence-based strategies for communicating the same."

The task force got the message and the DHS finally did away with the color coded system this year. I was obviously just one voice among many who had suggested they come up with something else, but I felt a satisfaction in knowing I at least contributed to the dialogue that moved policy-makers to come up with a better way to inform the public.

When the "Breaking News" stingers started sounding last night on the all-news channels to tell us about the current terror threat, I wondered if government officials would do the right thing and give us details of the threat. Within minutes, they did. We learned this was a "credible but unconfirmed terror threat." CNN has been told that American spy networks intercepted communications from a known al Qaeda operative in Pakistan indicating plans for a potential terrorist strike in New York or Washington D.C. We also know the possible plot involves three individuals including one American and that it may involve a vehicle packed with explosives. Local officials in New York have reported that precautions are being taken including vehicle checkpoints, the deploying of bomb-sniffing dogs, and additional police staffing.

In the past this information and the measures being taken against the potential plot might have been kept from the public or if we were informed, it might have come in the form of a generic or color-coded threat warning. Government officials didn't want the public to "panic" or conversely to become nonchalant when threats didn't pan out. But this time, we're getting "actionable" information. Government officials are balancing our need for information against other factors including how to catch the terrorists (if they are indeed in this country) before they strike.

We're being provided with information that we can use to form our own opinions about whether this is a real threat or not. We can use the information to decide if it's sensible to be in New York or Washington this weekend. We can be on the lookout for anything out of the ordinary.

Is the bomb threat real? My read is that counterterrorism officials don't know for sure but they've determined there's enough information in the intercepts to suggest it could be an active plot. But I'm glad they've decided to share what they know. We're beyond being panicked by such information in this country after what happened on our soil 10 years ago. We know that a decade after 9/11, there are still people out there who would like to attack us again.