For graffiti artists, abandoned skyscrapers in Miami and Los Angeles become a canvas for regular people to be seen and heard
In 2023-2024, graffiti artists tagged abandoned skyscrapers in Los Angeles and Miami, highlighting financial and political issues through their large, visible artworks.
Last Updated on September 18, 2024 by Daily News StaffConstruction of Oceanwide Plaza in downtown Los Angeles stalled in 2019 after the China-based developer ran out of funding. Mario Tama/Getty Images
In what’s known as “graffiti bombing,” artists in both cities swiftly and extensively tagged downtown skyscrapers that had been abandoned. The efforts took place over the course of a few nights in December 2023 and late January 2024, with the results generating a mix of admiration and condemnation.
KTLA 5 news highlights public outrage over a graffitied skyscraper in Los Angeles on Jan. 31, 2024.
As someone who has researched the intersection of graffiti and activism, I see these works as major milestones – and not just because the artists’ tags are perhaps more prominent than they’ve ever been, high above street level and visible from blocks away.
They also get to the heart of how money and politics can make individuals feel powerless – and how art can reclaim some of that power.
Since late 2019, Los Angeles’ billion-dollar Oceanwide Plaza – a mixed-use residential and retail complex consisting of three towers – has stood unfinished. The Beijing-based developer was unable to pay contractors, and ongoing financing challenges forced the company to put the project on pause. It’s located in one of the priciest parts of the city, right across the street from Crypto.com Arena, where the 2024 Grammy Awards were held.
Hundreds of taggers were involved in the Los Angeles graffiti bombing. It may never be publicly known how the idea was formed and by whom. But it seemed to have been inspired by a similar project that took place in Miami during Art Basel, the city’s annual international art fair.
In November 2023, the city of Miami announced that a permit to demolish One Bayfront Plaza site, an abandoned former VITAS Healthcare building, had been filed.
Over the course of a few days, graffiti artists – some of whom rappelled down the side of the building – tagged the brutalist, concrete structure with colorful bubble letters spelling their graffiti names: “EDBOX,” “SAUTE” and “1UP,” and hundreds more.
Advertisement
The response to the Miami bombing was more awe than outrage, perhaps because the building will soon be torn down. It elicited comparisons to 5Pointz, a collection of former factory buildings in the Queens borough of New York City that was covered with graffiti and became a landmark before being demolished in 2014.
Meaning and motivation
In the early 2000s, when I started researching street graffiti, I learned that there are different names for different graffiti types.
“Tags” are pseudonyms written in marker, sometimes with flourishes. “Fill-ins” or “throw-ups” are quickly painted fat letters or bubble letters, usually outlined. “Pieces” involve more colorful, complicated and stylized spray-painted letters.
The tradition of painting ornate graffiti names made me think of Paul Cézanne, who painted the same bowl of fruit over and over. The carefully chosen names and their letters become the subject that writers use to practice their craft.
But I also wanted to know why people graffitied.
Many graffiti writers tagged spaces to declare their existence, especially in a place like New York City, where it is easy to feel invisible. Some writers who became well known in the early 1970s, like Taki 183, scrawled their names and street numbers all over the city.
During my research, I spoke with one New York graffiti artist whose work had garnered a lot of attention in the 1980s. He explained that his writing had no concrete political messages.
“But,” he added, “the act of writing graffiti is always political.”
Another graffiti artist I interviewed, “PEN1,” stood with me on a street in lower Manhattan, pointing out one of his many works. It was a fill-in – huge letters near the top of a three- or four-story building, very visible from the street.
“Those people have paid so much money to put their message up there,” he said, pointing to nearby billboards, “and I get to put my name up there for free.”
Advertisement
Through my project, which I ended up titling “Unofficial Communication,” I came to understand that writing graffiti on walls, billboards and subway cars was a way of disrupting ideas of private ownership in public, outdoor spaces.
It involved three different sets of players. There were the taggers, who represented people defying the status quo. There were the public and private owners of the spaces. And there was the municipal government, which regularly cleaned graffiti from outdoor surfaces and tried to arrest taggers.
In cities across the U.S., then and now, it’s easy to see whose interests are the priority, whose mistakes governments are willing to overlook, and which people they aggressively police and penalize.
Loud and clear
The names painted on the Los Angeles skyscrapers are the faster and easier-to-complete fill-ins, since time is at a premium and the artists risk arrest.
These vertical graffiti bombing projects on failed skyscrapers, deliberately or not, call attention to the millions of dollars that are absorbed by taxpayers when private developers make bad investments.
Because the names painted on the buildings are fill-ins, they’re not especially artistic. But they did, in fact, make a political statement.
A former graffiti artist who goes by “ACTUAL” told The Washington Post that he’d come out of retirement to contribute to the Los Angeles project.
“The money invested in [the buildings] could have done so much for this city,” he added.
Some of the graffiti artists in Los Angeles were arrested, and the Los Angeles City Council is demanding that the owners of Oceanwide Plaza remove the graffiti, described as the work of “criminals” acting “recklessly.”
Meanwhile, the developers of buildings that have sat, unfinished, for years, in the middle of a housing crisis, have broken no laws.
Advertisement
Some reckless acts, apparently, are more criminal than others.
Veteran actor T.K. Carter, best known for his roles in The Thing and the popular 1980s television series Punky Brewster, has died at the age of 69.
Authorities confirmed Carter was found unresponsive at his home in Duarte, California. No foul play is suspected, and an official cause of death has not yet been released.
A Career Spanning Decades
Born Thomas Kent Carter, T.K. Carter built a career in film and television that spanned more than four decades. He became a cult favorite portraying Nauls in John Carpenter’s 1982 horror classic The Thing, a film that continues to influence the genre today.
Television audiences widely remember Carter for his role as Mike Fulton on Punky Brewster, where his comedic timing and grounded performances helped make the show a lasting favorite of the era.
Film and Television Legacy
In addition to his best-known roles, Carter appeared in films such as Runaway Train, Ski Patrol, and Space Jam. His television work included guest appearances on a wide range of series throughout the 1980s, 1990s, and beyond.
Known within the industry as a reliable and versatile performer, Carter often brought authenticity and warmth to supporting roles that left a lasting impression, even in brief appearances.
Remembering T.K. Carter
As news of his passing spreads, fans and colleagues alike are reflecting on T.K. Carter’s contributions to film and television. While he may not have always been the leading name on the marquee, his work helped shape stories that continue to be watched and appreciated by new generations.
T.K. Carter is remembered for his enduring performances, professional dedication, and the quiet but meaningful legacy he leaves behind.
Stay with STM Daily News for updates to this developing story and more independent coverage of entertainment, history, and culture. Visit www.stmdailynews.com for the latest.
Gregory Outreach Services Expands Food Access with Addition of Third Refrigerated Van
Gregory Outreach Services expands its mission to fight food insecurity with the addition of a third refrigerated van, doubling food access for low-income seniors and veterans in Phoenix.
Gregory Outreach Services’ newest refrigerated delivery van expands food access for low-income seniors and veterans across Phoenix.
Phoenix, AZ — Gregory Outreach Services has taken a major step forward in its mission to fight food insecurity with the addition of a third refrigerated delivery van, significantly expanding its capacity to serve low-income seniors and veterans across the Phoenix area.
The new refrigerated van was made possible through the support of a generous anonymous donor. The expansion is further strengthened by the continued generosity of the BHHS Legacy Foundation, who donated fresh produce to support the organization’s growing distribution efforts.
As rising food costs and inflation continue to place pressure on individuals living on fixed incomes, the need for reliable access to nutritious food has never been greater. This latest addition to the organization’s mobile fleet allows Gregory Outreach Services to double the number of individuals served, while maintaining strict food safety and quality standards.
“As the cost of living continues to rise, more seniors and veterans are struggling to afford nutritious food,” said Diana Gregory, Founder and CEO of Gregory Outreach Services. “This van allows us to bridge a widening gap for individuals living on fixed incomes, many of whom face mobility challenges and limited access to fresh food options.”
Meeting a Growing Community Need
Gregory Outreach Services works directly with seniors and veterans who are disproportionately affected by inflation, medical expenses, and transportation barriers. For many, simply reaching a grocery store can be a challenge. Refrigerated vehicles are essential to ensuring that fresh fruits and vegetables arrive safely and consistently at senior housing communities, veteran shelters, and community distribution sites.
“This third van complements the two already in operation and represents a critical milestone in our growth,” Gregory added. “We are deeply grateful to our anonymous donor for investing in our mission, and to BHHS Legacy Foundation’s Board of Directors and its CEO, Jerry Wissink for Legacy’s generosity in donating fresh produce. Together, this support allows us to scale our impact and respond to the increasing needs of our community.”
Expanding Impact While Preserving Dignity
With an expanded fleet and increased food supply, Gregory Outreach Services is better positioned to address food insecurity, promote healthier outcomes, and serve seniors and veterans with dignity, respect, and care. The organization’s mobile delivery model ensures help reaches those who need it most — directly and reliably.
About Gregory Outreach Services
Advertisement
Gregory Outreach Services is a nonprofit organization dedicated to improving health outcomes for low-income seniors and veterans through mobile produce delivery, nutrition education, and community-based wellness programs. By bringing fresh food directly to those most in need, the organization works to reduce food insecurity and strengthen community wellness.
Discover inspiring stories of changemakers making a positive impact. Explore videos and articles of people tackling today’s biggest challenges with action and hope. Visit: https://stmdailynews.com/stories-of-change/
Dive into “The Knowledge,” where curiosity meets clarity. This playlist, in collaboration with STMDailyNews.com, is designed for viewers who value historical accuracy and insightful learning. Our short videos, ranging from 30 seconds to a minute and a half, make complex subjects easy to grasp in no time. Covering everything from historical events to contemporary processes and entertainment, “The Knowledge” bridges the past with the present. In a world where information is abundant yet often misused, our series aims to guide you through the noise, preserving vital knowledge and truths that shape our lives today. Perfect for curious minds eager to discover the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of everything around us. Subscribe and join in as we explore the facts that matter. https://stmdailynews.com/the-knowledge/Get The Knowledge. Read more community news and local stories at STM Daily News.
Slayer Rule Explained: How Rob Reiner’s Estate Could Be Handled After the Killings
After the deaths of Rob Reiner and Michele Singer Reiner, legal experts explain how the “slayer rule” can block a killer from inheriting—and what could happen next in probate court.
All states have some form of a slayer rule that prevents killers from inheriting from their victims. While the rules differ slightly from state to state, they always bar murderers from profiting from their own crimes. Simply put, if you’re found guilty of killing someone or plead guilty to their murder, you can’t inherit anything from your victim’s estate. In some states, this might go beyond inheritance and apply to jointly held property, insurance policies and other kinds of accounts. Most of these slayer rules, including California’s, apply only to “felonious and intentional” killings, meaning that they don’t apply if you accidentally kill someone. Although there doesn’t have to be a guilty verdict by a judge or a jury, or a guilty plea from the accused, there must be some finding by a criminal or civil court of an intentional and felonious killing. These rules, known as slayer rules, have a long history in the United States. They became more prominent following an 1889 murder case in New York state, in which a 16-year-old boy poisoned his grandfather to get an inheritance that was written into his grandfather’s will.
How often are slayer rules invoked?
It’s hard to say for sure. As far as we know, nobody’s tried to keep track. Slayer rules come into play whenever someone who would otherwise inherit assets from an estate is convicted of or found liable for murder, and the slayer is entitled to inherit from the victim. These tragic cases almost always involve murders committed by relatives. Many of the high-profile ones have been tied to murders that occurred in California. Famous disinherited murderers include Lyle and Erik Menendez, the Californians known as the Menendez brothers. In 1996, a jury found them guilty of the first-degree murder of their parents, José and Mary Louise “Kitty” Menendez. The Menendez brothers’ parents, who were killed in 1989, had a fortune that today would be worth more than $35 million. The brothers, who became eligible for parole but were denied it in 2025, have been in prison ever since. Once there has been a finding of an intentional and felonious killing, even if the slayer is later released on parole – or even if they serve no prison time at all – they would still not inherit anything. In practical terms, that means if one or both of the Menendez brothers were to win parole in the future, they would still be ineligible to inherit any of their parents’ wealth upon their release from prison. California’s slayer rule also meant that salesman Scott Peterson, who was convicted of killing his pregnant wife, Laci Peterson, in 2002, couldn’t collect the money he would otherwise have been due from her life insurance policy. Peterson has been in prison since 2005.Erik Menendez, left, and Lyle Menendez, seen standing trial for their parents’ murders, in 1994. They were convicted in 1996.Ted Soqui/Sygma via Getty Images
What can block its application?
In the absence of a murder conviction, the slayer rule may not apply. For example, a conviction for a lesser criminal offense, such as manslaughter, might allow the accused – or their lawyers – to argue that the killing was unintentional. This exception could be relevant to the prosecution of the Reiners’ murders if it were to turn out that Nick Reiner’s defense can show that substance abuseor schizophrenia rendered him insane when he allegedly killed his parents at their Los Angeles home. On the other hand, under California law, even if there is no conviction the probate court administering the murder victim’s estate could still separately find that the killing was intentional and felonious. That civil finding would bar the slayer from inheriting without a criminal conviction.Rob Reiner and his son Nick, seen in 2016 speaking about ‘Being Charlie,’ the movie about a young man’s struggle with substance use that they made together.Laura Cavanaugh/FilmMagic via Getty Images
Does this only apply to families with big fortunes?
Slayer rules apply to anyone who kills one or more of their relatives, whether their victims were rich, poor or in between. When large amounts of money are at stake, cases tend to garner more attention due to media coverage during the criminal trial and subsequent inheritance litigation.
Who will inherit Rob Reiner’s and Michele Singer Reiner’s wealth?
It’s too soon for both the public and the family to know who will inherit ultimately from the Reiners. Wills are typically public documents, although the Reiners may have also engaged in other types of estate planning, such as trusts, that do not typically become public records. And celebrities with valuable intellectual property rights, such as copyrights from the Reiners’ many film and television properties, tend to establish trusts. Assuming that, like many parents, the Reiners left most of their fortune – which reportedly was worth some US$200 million – to their children, including Nick, then California’s slayer statute may come into play. The couple had two other children together, Romy and Jake. Rob Reiner also had another daughter, Tracy Reiner, whom he adopted after his marriage to his first wife, the actor and filmmaker Penny Marshall. It’s also likely that the Reiners included charitable bequests in their estate plans. They were strong supporters of many causes, including early childhood development.
Might the slayer rule apply to Nick Reiner?
It’s much too soon to know. It is important to emphasize that the wills and other estate planning documents of Rob Reiner and Michele Singer Reiner have not yet been made public. That means what Nick Reiner might stand to inherit, if the slayer rule were to prove irrelevant in this case, is unknown. Nor, with the investigation of the couple’s deaths still underway, can anyone make any assumptions about Nick’s innocence or guilt. And, as of mid-December 2025, an unnamed source was telling entertainment reporters that Nick Reiner’s legal bills were being paid for by the Reiner family. Naomi Cahn, Professor of Law, University of Virginia and Reid Kress Weisbord, Distinguished Professor of Law and Judge Norma Shapiro Scholar, Rutgers University – Newark This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.