Business
Column: Is UCLA 'a failed medical school'? Debunking a dumb right-wing meme
The right-wing and Republican project to eradicate diversity and inclusiveness from American society has become more absurd with every passing day, but it will be hard for anyone to produce a more vapid and fatuous effort than a recent article labeling UCLA’s David Geffen School of Medicine as a “failed medical school.”
The reason for that label, according to the right-wing Washington Free Beacon, which published the article, is that UCLA has “prioritized diversity over merit, resulting in progressively less qualified classes that are now struggling to succeed.”
To its perverse credit, the Beacon doesn’t conceal the racist import of its claims; on the contrary, it announces it outright, citing the school’s “race-based admissions” and quoting one of its anonymous sources (there is no other category) as saying, “We want diversity so badly, we’re willing to cut corners to get it.”
We’re not backing off from diversity, equity and inclusion in our medical school curricula. It’s really intended to train the next generation of physicians to respond appropriately to a rapid growth in diversity.
—
Steven Dubinett, dean, UCLA School of Medicine
An admissions officer is quoted anonymously as grousing, “All the normal criteria for getting into medical school only apply to people of certain races. For other people, those criteria are completely disregarded.”
The article purports to rely on complaints from eight of the school’s faculty members. The medical school’s full-time faculty numbers more than 2,000, with an additional 2,000 to 2,500 part-timers or adjuncts. That should give you a clue to how deeply the Beacon delved into the facts before issuing its eye-catching conclusion.
But that’s only one aspect of a piece that trips over its supposed “facts” at almost every turn, openly cherry-picks data to confirm its biases, and treats every factoid as an artifact of the quest for diversity. Its author doesn’t even appear to understand the difference between the student admissions process and the process of accepting residents, who are medical school graduates, many if not most of whom received their medical education elsewhere.
“I consider it to be fact-free,” Steven M. Dubinett, the school’s dean, told me about the Beacon article. He’s being kind.
Before delving into the article itself, a few words abut the Washington Free Beacon. The Beacon was founded in 2012 with funding from, among other conservatives, hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer. Its first editor was co-founder Matthew Continetti, who is a son-in-law of conservative pundit Bill Kristol.
The Beacon’s driving impulse appears to be “owning the libs,” as shown by its preening over its role in advancing the criticism of former Harvard President Claudine Gay for what many in the academic community regard as trivial cases of plagiarism.
That scandal-mongering was basically the handiwork of right-wing attack dog Christopher Rufo, who carried the theme further by accusing other Harvard figures of plagiarism; curiously, as the Harvard Crimson notes, they were all Black women, like Gay.
The Beacon’s tone was described as “puckish” by a Washington Post writer who apparently doesn’t know what “puckish” means; he praised it in the same article as standing a hair above other right-wing websites, which strikes me as a bit like trying to identify the best “Sharknado” movie. The basis of his praise was that the Beacon “does significant reporting of its own.” But if “significant” means “cogent,” that quality isn’t much in evidence in the article about UCLA.
So let’s pick up our endoscopes and take a look inside.
The main target of the article is Jennifer Lucero, who became associate dean for admissions in June 2020. The article posits that her arrival in that post, and her focus on diversity, led to a precipitous drop in the quality of incoming students. More on that in a moment.
The article’s empirical assertions, such as they are, start with the annual medical school rankings of U.S. News and World Report. These have been controversial for years, in part because their methodology is suspect. As a result, many of the top-ranked schools have stopped cooperating with them, though the University of California still participates.
The article’s author, Aaron Sibarium, wrings his hands over the fact that UCLA’s ranking in “research” has fallen to 18th from sixth place in just the first three years after Lucero’s arrival.
Couple of problems there. One is that research ranking tracks the activities of faculty members, not students. It has nothing to do with the record of the incoming class. Dubinett says that one reason UCLA may have fallen in the rankings is that it has assigned more faculty to clinical education rather than research, so the grant level per faculty has naturally declined.
But that’s not the only measure of research quality. Consider the grant approvals by the National Institutes of Health, the nation’s leading source of public grants in medicine. UC as a whole has consistently been a top recipient of NIH grants — ranking first in the nation since at least 2000 and probably for much longer than that. For most of that period, UCLA has been the second-largest recipient among UC campuses behind the research powerhouse of UC San Francisco.
From 2010 through 2019 and again in 2022 UCLA fell to third behind UCSF and narrowly behind UC San Diego, but for three of the four years of Lucero’s tenure it’s been second. There’s no sign there of a decline in research stature.
Sibarium, who did not respond to a request for comment, deserves an F in that category but an A for cherry-picking. On the other metric that U.S. News uses consistently, primary care, UCLA has risen in rank since 2020, to 10th in the nation from 11th. And in other categories, the school’s ranking has risen since 2020 — for example to seventh from 10th in internal medicine and sixth from 12th in pediatrics.
Sibarium’s other “gotcha” concerns the UCLA students’ records on shelf exams, which are given after each clinical rotation. He asserts that their failure rates have risen precipitously during the Lucero era: “As the demographics of UCLA have changed,” he writes, “the number of students failing their shelf exams has soared.” He quotes a professor, anonymously, saying, “Faculty are seeing a shocking decline in knowledge of medical students.”
But as he acknowledges, UCLA dramatically changed its academic schedule in 2020. Along with many other top schools, it moved students out of the classroom in the second of their four years of education, instead of waiting for the third. That deprived students of a full year of clinical training before they took the shelf, so of course they did worse. But the official chart illustrating Sibarium’s article shows that the failure rate on most clinical specialties has fallen as the students progressed from Year 2 to Year 3.
“The challenge of moving the exams earlier has been written about,” Dubinett says. But the trend lines show that by the end of their third year, well more than 90% of UCLA’s students are passing the shelf exams in almost every clinical discipline.
The Beacon’s brief against Lucero is tied to its evident resentment of diversity programs. Sibarium points to a required first-year course titled “Structural Racism and Health Equity,” which comprises “three to four hours every other week,” as though a twice-monthly course is supposed to be an unsupportable burden to medical students.
Is there a point to that sort of training? Of course there is: “We’re cognizant that more than 80% of health is based on social determinants,” Dubinett says, pointing out that the phenomenon was very much on display in racial and ethnic disparities in treatment and outcomes during the pandemic.
“These inequities result, in large part, from racial and ethnic minority populations’ inequitable access to health care, which persists because of structural racism in health care policy,” according to a 2022 paper in Health Affairs.
“We’re not backing off from diversity, equity and inclusion in our medical school curricula,” Dubinett says. “It’s really intended to train the next generation of physicians to respond appropriately to a rapid growth in diversity.” In few other places are the impacts of inattention to social conditions more evident than in Los Angeles, he says. “We can look no further than what’s outside our front door — if I drive 15 minutes to the south from my office, life expectancy falls by 15 years.”
The Beacon even states that diversity efforts at UCLA may be illegal or unconstitutional, since the state’s voters outlawed racial preferences at public institutions in 1996 and the U.S. Supreme Court overturned them nationwide last year.
To support this absurd claim, Sibarium turns to Adam Mortara, the lawyer who represented the plaintiffs in the Supreme Court case. Asking for information about an applicant’s race when “no lawful use can be made of it” is “presumptively illegal,” Mortara said. He added, “You can’t have evidence of overt discrimination like this and not have someone come forward” as a plaintiff.
The problem here is that there’s no evidence that the medical school has applied racial or ethnic standards to its applicants. Sibarium admits as much: The application committee “for students does not see the race or ethnicity of applicants,” he writes. So where’s the beef?
Sibarium insinuates that Lucero has exercised undue influence over residency acceptances. But he finds that she’s a member of the hiring committee only for anesthesia residents (anesthesia is Lucero’s medical specialty). Couple of issues here. One is that almost no one gets hired for a medical residency anywhere without an interview, either in person or by zoom, which is designed to give the committee a holistic sense of the applicants’ character and personality, not just their test scores.
Another is that by the author’s own admission, Lucero hasn’t been especially effective in instituting diversity tests for anesthesia residents. He cites one case in which she advocated that a white candidate be ranked downward and another in which she “insisted that a Hispanic applicant who had performed poorly on her anesthesiology rotation in medical school should be bumped up.” As it happened, he reports, “neither candidate was ultimately moved.”
(As for a case Sibarium mentions in which Lucero supposedly pushed to admit a Black student whose grades and test scores were below the UCLA average, he doesn’t say whether the student was admitted.)
It’s true that the UCLA entering medical school class has become more diverse over time. Figures issued by UCLA and published by the Beacon show that from 2019 through 2022, the number of whites in the 173-member class declined to 46 from 49, the number of Black students rose to 25 from 22, Hispanic students rose from 25 to 37, a catchall “other” category grew to 20 from eight, and American Indians, Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders went from zero to three. The number of Asian students declined to 55 from 84.
Does this validate the article’s claim, voiced by an anonymous source, that “a third to a half of the medical school is incredibly unqualified”?
The math doesn’t pencil out. As blogger and statistics maven Kevin Drum notes, given that the number of nonwhite and non-Asian students increased by only 30 ion three years, even if “every single one of these students was woefully unqualified, that’s about 17% of the class. How do you get from there to ‘a third to a half’?”
By the way, the median grade point averages and scores on the Medical College Admission Test of accepted applicants haven’t declined at all since 2020 — the MCAT average in 2023 was the same as in 2020, and the GPA rose by a hair.
In emails to the medical school class, Dubinett and his fellow deans have reinforced their commitment to merit-based admissions and diversity training. “Students and faculty members are held to the highest standards of academic excellence,” they wrote. “Highly qualified medical students and trainees are admitted … based on merit in a process consistent with state and federal law.” That said, “we are enriched by the diverse experiences each of you brings to our community.”
UCLA, then, is standing firm against the right wing’s drive to pretend that racial and ethnic discrimination doesn’t exist in our society and to undermine efforts to wipe it out. Would that more institutions took that stand, instead of capitulating to a dishonest, braying mob.
Business
Ties between California and Venezuela go back more than a century with Chevron
As a stunned world processes the U.S. government’s sudden intervention in Venezuela — debating its legality, guessing who the ultimate winners and losers will be — a company founded in California with deep ties to the Golden State could be among the prime beneficiaries.
Venezuela has the largest proven oil reserves on the planet. Chevron, the international petroleum conglomerate with a massive refinery in El Segundo and headquartered, until recently, in San Ramon, is the only foreign oil company that has continued operating there through decades of revolution.
Other major oil companies, including ConocoPhillips and Exxon Mobil, pulled out of Venezuela in 2007 when then-President Hugo Chávez required them to surrender majority ownership of their operations to the country’s state-controlled oil company, PDVSA.
But Chevron remained, playing the “long game,” according to industry analysts, hoping to someday resume reaping big profits from the investments the company started making there almost a century ago.
Looks like that bet might finally pay off.
In his news conference Saturday, after U.S. Special Forces snatched Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife in Caracas and extradited them to face drug-trafficking charges in New York, President Trump said the U.S. would “run” Venezuela and open more of its massive oil reserves to American corporations.
“We’re going to have our very large U.S. oil companies, the biggest anywhere in the world, go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken infrastructure, the oil infrastructure, and start making money for the country,” Trump said during a news conference Saturday.
While oil industry analysts temper expectations by warning it could take years to start extracting significant profits given Venezuela’s long-neglected, dilapidated infrastructure, and everyday Venezuelans worry about the proceeds flowing out of the country and into the pockets of U.S. investors, there’s one group who could be forgiven for jumping with unreserved joy: Chevron insiders who championed the decision to remain in Venezuela all these years.
But the company’s official response to the stunning turn of events has been poker-faced.
“Chevron remains focused on the safety and well-being of our employees, as well as the integrity of our assets,” spokesman Bill Turenne emailed The Times on Sunday, the same statement the company sent to news outlets all weekend. “We continue to operate in full compliance with all relevant laws and regulations.”
Turenne did not respond to questions about the possible financial rewards for the company stemming from this weekend’s U.S. military action.
Chevron, which is a direct descendant of a small oil company founded in Southern California in the 1870s, has grown into a $300-billion global corporation. It was headquartered in San Ramon, just outside of San Francisco, until executives announced in August 2024 that they were fleeing high-cost California for Houston.
Texas’ relatively low taxes and light regulation have been a beacon for many California companies, and most of Chevron’s competitors are based there.
Chevron began exploring in Venezuela in the early 1920s, according to the company’s website, and ramped up operations after discovering the massive Boscan oil field in the 1940s. Over the decades, it grew into Venezuela’s largest foreign investor.
The company held on over the decades as Venezuela’s government moved steadily to the left; it began to nationalize the oil industry by creating a state-owned petroleum company in 1976, and then demanded majority ownership of foreign oil assets in 2007, under then-President Hugo Chávez.
Venezuela has the world’s largest proven crude oil reserves — meaning they’re economical to tap — about 303 billion barrels, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
But even with those massive reserves, Venezuela has been producing less than 1% of the world’s crude oil supply. Production has steadily declined from the 3.5 million barrels per day pumped in 1999 to just over 1 million barrels per day now.
Currently, Chevron’s operations in Venezuela employ about 3,000 people and produce between 250,000 and 300,000 barrels of oil per day, according to published reports.
That’s less than 10% of the roughly 3 million barrels the company produces from holdings scattered across the globe, from the Gulf of Mexico to Kazakhstan and Australia.
But some analysts are optimistic that Venezuela could double or triple its current output relatively quickly — which could lead to a windfall for Chevron.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Business
‘Stranger Things’ finale turns box office downside up pulling in an estimated $25 million
The finale of Netflix’s blockbuster series “Stranger Things” gave movie theaters a much needed jolt, generating an estimated $20 to $25 million at the box office, according to multiple reports.
Matt and Ross Duffer’s supernatural thriller debuted simultaneously on the streaming platform and some 600 cinemas on New Year’s Eve and held encore showings all through New Year’s Day.
Owing to the cast’s contractual terms for residuals, theaters could not charge for tickets. Instead, fans reserved seats for performances directly from theaters, paying for mandatory food and beverage vouchers. AMC and Cinemark Theatres charged $20 for the concession vouchers while Regal Cinemas charged $11 — in homage to the show’s lead character, Eleven, played by Millie Bobby Brown.
AMC Theatres, the world’s largest theater chain, played the finale at 231 of its theaters across the U.S. — which accounted for one-third of all theaters that held screenings over the holiday.
The chain said that more than 753,000 viewers attended a performance at one of its cinemas over two days, bringing in more than $15 million.
Expectations for the theater showing was high.
“Our year ends on a high: Netflix’s Strangers Things series finale to show in many AMC theatres this week. Two days only New Year’s Eve and Jan 1.,” tweeted AMC’s CEO Adam Aron on Dec. 30. “Theatres are packed. Many sellouts but seats still available. How many Stranger Things tickets do you think AMC will sell?”
It was a rare win for the lagging domestic box office.
In 2025, revenue in the U.S. and Canada was expected to reach $8.87 billion, which was marginally better than 2024 and only 20% more than pre-pandemic levels, according to movie data firm Comscore.
With few exceptions, moviegoers have stayed home. As of Dec. 25., only an estimated 760 million tickets were sold, according to media and entertainment data firm EntTelligence, compared with 2024, during which total ticket sales exceeded 800 million.
Business
Tesla dethroned as the world’s top EV maker
Elon Musk’s Tesla is no longer the top electric vehicle seller in the world as demand at home has cooled while competition heated up abroad.
Tesla lost its pole position after reporting 1.64 million deliveries in 2025, roughly 620,000 fewer than Chinese competitor BYD.
Tesla struggled last year amid increasing competition, waning federal support for electric vehicle adoption and brand damage triggered by Musk’s stint in the White House.
Musk is turning his focus toward robotics and autonomous driving technology in an effort to keep Tesla relevant as its EVs lose popularity.
On Friday, the company reported lower than expected delivery numbers for the fourth quarter of 2025, a decline from the previous quarter and a year-over-year decrease of 16%. Tesla delivered 418,227 vehicles in the fourth quarter and produced 434,358.
According to a company-compiled consensus from analysts posted on Tesla’s website in December, the company was projected to deliver nearly 423,000 vehicles in the fourth quarter.
Tesla’s annual deliveries fell roughly 8% last year from 1.79 million in 2024. Its third-quarter deliveries saw a boost as consumers rushed to buy electric vehicles before a $7,500 tax credit expired at the end of September.
“There are so many contributing factors ranging from the lack of evolution and true innovation of Musk’s product to the loss of the EV credits,” said Karl Brauer, an analyst at iSeeCars.com. “Teslas are just starting to look old. You have a bunch of other options, and they all look newer and fresher.”
BYD is making premium electric vehicles at an affordable price point, Brauer said, but steep tariffs on Chinese EVs have effectively prevented the cars from gaining popularity in the U.S.
Other international automakers like South Korea’s Hyundai and Germany’s Volkswagen have been expanding their EV offerings.
In the third quarter last year, the American automaker Ford sold a record number of electric vehicles, bolstered by its popular Mustang Mach-E SUV and F-150 Lightning pickup truck.
In October, Tesla released long-anticipated lower-cost versions of its Model 3 and Model Y in an attempt to attract new customers.
However, analysts and investors were disappointed by the launch, saying the models, which start at $36,990, aren’t affordable enough to entice a new group of consumers to consider going green.
As evidenced by Tesla’s continuing sales decline, the new Model 3 and Model Y have not been huge wins for the company, Brauer said.
“There’s a core Tesla following who will never choose anything else, but that’s not how you grow,” Brauer said.
Tesla lost a swath of customers last year when Musk joined the Trump administration as the head of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency.
Left-leaning Tesla owners, who were originally attracted to the brand for its environmental benefits, became alienated by Musk’s political activity.
Consumers held protests against the brand and some celebrities made a point of selling their Teslas.
Although Musk left the White House, the company sustained significant and lasting reputation damage, experts said.
Investors, however, remain largely optimistic about Tesla’s future.
Shares are up nearly 40% over the last six months and have risen 16% over the past year.
Brauer said investors are clinging to the hope that Musk’s robotaxi business will take off and the ambitious chief executive will succeed in developing humanoid robots and self-driving cars.
The roll-out of Tesla robotaxis in Austin, Texas, last summer was full of glitches, and experts say Tesla has a long way to go to catch up with the autonomous ride-hailing company Waymo.
Still, the burgeoning robotaxi industry could be extremely lucrative for Tesla if Musk can deliver on his promises.
“Musk has done a good job, increasingly in the past year, of switching the conversation from Tesla sales to AI and robotics,” Brauer said. “I think current stock price largely reflects that.”
Shares were down about 2% on Friday after the company reported earnings.
-
World1 week agoHamas builds new terror regime in Gaza, recruiting teens amid problematic election
-
Business1 week agoGoogle is at last letting users swap out embarrassing Gmail addresses without losing their data
-
Indianapolis, IN1 week agoIndianapolis Colts playoffs: Updated elimination scenario, AFC standings, playoff picture for Week 17
-
News1 week agoRoads could remain slick, icy Saturday morning in Philadelphia area, tracking another storm on the way
-
Politics1 week agoMost shocking examples of Chinese espionage uncovered by the US this year: ‘Just the tip of the iceberg’
-
World1 week agoPodcast: The 2025 EU-US relationship explained simply
-
News1 week agoFor those who help the poor, 2025 goes down as a year of chaos
-
Politics1 week ago‘Unlucky’ Honduran woman arrested after allegedly running red light and crashing into ICE vehicle