KPFA staff vs. listeners

"KPFA Staff Close Ranks Against Listener Involvement In the Program
Council."

Report on the Saturday 4/17/04 Special Meeting of KPFA Local Station
Board (LSB) on Program Council Decision to Switch Starting Times for
Democracy Now! and The Morning Show.

In a direct attack on listener involvement in station programming
decisions, Max Pringle, KPFA Staff LSB member, called the listener
and community members on the Program Council "self-appointed
guardians of the station with too much time on their hands." In a
red-baiting attack, Larry Bensky called the listeners and unpaid
staff on the PC "Stalinist."

The issue is how will the Program Council (PC) make decisions and
who can override the PC decisions.

Background: Before the 1999 KPFA lockout of staff no listeners were
allowed on the secretive KPFA PC, either as members or observers, no
minutes were posted, and few knew what went on there. After the over
10,000 listeners rallied to return staff to the station and listeners
organized the first ever election of the Local Advisory Board (LAB),
the staff and management allowed for listeners to become members of
the PC. Three members of the LSB and three additional members of the
community appointed by the LAB became members of the PC along with
management, department heads, and unpaid staff. The six LAB-
community members were still a minority on the 15 person PC. The
staff and management still kept the PC meetings closed to the public.

The arrangement appeared to work as long as no controversial decision
was made. As long as the PC never decided to rearrange any of
the "permanent" programming staff there was little complaint about
the LAB-community members being on the PC. The PC was largely
restricted to making decisions about which special programming could
preempt regular programs on a one-time basis, and occasionally a new
program was introduced when another programmer decided to go off the
air.

All that changed when the issue of which hour to air Democracy Now!
became an item on the PC agenda. The unpaid staff representatives on
the PC and the LAB/community reps voted together to make a majority
vote on the decision to move DN! from its current two slots of 6-7
a.m. and 9-10 a.m. slot to a one-time morning broadcast at 7-8 a.m.
and to move The Morning Show from its 7-9 a.m. time slot to 8-10
a.m. What to do with the 6-7 a.m. time on a regular basis was
deferred until after the switch between DN! and The Morning Show and
in the mean time temporary programming would be aired at 6 am or DN
would air back-to-back for awhile.

This decision was the first decision of the PC since including
LAB/community members that actually made a change in regular
programming that affected the program of any paid staff person.
First, the paid staff fought back to prevent the decision, and
failing that they fought to prevent its implementation. As the
decision was being considered last year, on several occasions the
paid staff would not come to PC meetings and thus prevented the
question from being considered for many weeks.

When this tactic failed the meetings went on with full
considerations. The PC eventually heard from The Morning Show paid
staff with their objections as well as hearing from the paid staff
department heads on the PC who were against the move. The
development director was a member of the PC, and he had the
opportunity to present any fund-raising arguments about the decision,
but he did not do so before the decision was made. The subscriptions
manager was asked to provide pledging data so the PC could review the
potential financial impact of the move. The PC reviewed the hour by
hour fund-raising of the programs along with data on general radio
peak audience numbers. (KPFA no longer receives Arbitron information
on KPFA specifically.) Throughout this process the paid staff and
management of KPFA never asked to bring this issue to the listeners
or even announced to the listeners that the issue was being
considered. (The listener members on the PC had agreed to
confidentiality as part of their being allowed onto the PC by staff
and management.)

After full consideration of the move, the PC voted to adopt the
move. Then the paid staff began an intense lobbying campaign within
the station to get the KPFA General Manager to override the decision
and prevent its implementation. Incredibly, a coalition of paid and
unpaid staff and management have now attacked the decision as being
done within closed doors even though it was been paid staff and
management who had demanded and continue to demand that PC meetings
be closed to the public.

The Morning Show staff and their supporters lobbied so intensely that
a weekend retreat of the PC last November was devoted primarily to
dealing with the issue. At the closed retreat held under a cloak of
confidentiality, but recently reported on at the LSB meeting, the
participants discussed the decision and agreed that the PC had the
authority make decisions on programming, and that those decisions
would be made by majority vote of the PC.

However, shortly after this supposed truce, the General Manager
announced he would be leaving the station soon. Apparently, the
lobbying from various staff members was part of the heavy burden that
made the GM's job seem unbearable. The GM then unilaterally
cancelled several PC meetings in December and January, and the
implementation of the decision was once again torpedoed and put on
hold.

Additionally the affected staff continued an intense campaign to
rally all the paid staff and many unpaid staff to their cause. They
began calling the decision flawed because if was made by
LAB/community members who they said do not have radio experience,
even though four of the six LAB/community members have current or
prior radio experience. The paid staff began denouncing the
decisions as being made without financial data, even though financial
data was considered by the PC, and the paid staff and management on
the PC were free at any time to bring alternative financial data to
the PC for consideration, but did not.

A most telling maneuver of the staff was their use of the
phrase: "entrenched staff." Apparently from staff comments at the
meeting, the long time staff who were against the decision began
telling other staff that the listeners on the PC were attacking all
staff as being "entrenched" without distinguishing between staff who
have been there over twenty years from staff who have been there less
than two years.

At Saturday's special LSB meeting, the staff showed up in
unprecedented numbers. Except for one or two of the approximately 30
staff who came to the meeting, none of these staff members had
participated in any of the bylaws meetings in the last two years.
You could count on the fingers of one hand the number who had
attended any previous LAB or LSB meeting. Yet here they were arguing
that the PC decision was an attack on staff by listeners who had the
audacity to call them "entrenched staff." It was particularly ironic
to see several of the young staff who had only been hired in the last
two years clearly parroting what they had been told by the long time
staff when one after another they stated they were upset that they
were being call "entrenched" staff. It was clear that the long-time
staff's propaganda against listeners was working on the new staff.
Curt Grey's public comments included saying to them, "Look, if you
are new staff and not entrenched then obviously you are not included
in the label of `entrenched' staff."

Management and staff ironically now argued at the meeting for greater
listener input by the use of surveys to see if listeners wanted the
change in program times. Ironic, because these same staff attacked
the decision because the listeners on the PC had "no radio
experience." Also ironic because none of them suggested that the PC
should be open to the public so that listeners would know what was
being discussed in a timely basis. Ironic because it has been the
staff and management who have not included listeners in the decision
making process over the last 10 months of it. And ironic because it
is the same management who has not produced a single issue of the
Folio where listeners could be informed of these matters and our
suggestions for programming invited, even though a line item for the
Folio has been in the budget for two years.

At Saturday's special LSB meeting there were two resolutions
presented in a report from the LSB members who are on the PC. First
was a resolution to approve the current PC structure and decision
making process and to specify the reasons that a GM could override
the PC's decisions. The second resolution is to decide whether the
PC's decision on the matter of the DN! and The Morning Show should be
supported. This second resolution was not addressed because the
debate on the first revolution was not completed before the meeting
was adjourned. The debate is scheduled to resume at the regular LSB
meeting this coming Sunday April 25th at Noon at The Humanist Hall,
Oakland..

During the public comment period, in addition to using the
term "entrenched." several staff frequently used another term that
appeared to be on their talking sheet by accusing the LSB of "micro
managing." This claim is a direct falsehood. The LSB resolutions do
not attempt to make any management decision much less to micro
manage. The LSB resolutions only adopt a legitimate policy in support
of the decision making process and the decision that was made by the
PC. However, the staff had a mantra that if the LSB were to weigh in
and endorse or support the PC structure then the LSB would be "micro
managing."

It was the staff and management who, after all, had agreed to and
participated in the decision making process without complaint until a
decision was made that went against the paid staff on The Morning
Show. But even more importantly the concept of "micro managing" is
being misused. Micro managing would be telling a programmer what
music they could play or what guest they could book to interview.
The PC's decision to switch the time of the two programs is itself
not micro managing, it is managing, and the PC is the managing tool
that was created with the endorsement of station management to make
those very decisions. The LSB resolutions approving the decision
making process are not even "managing," much less "micro managing,"
because the proposed resolution is only affirming the current policy
for the structure of the PC, and neither directing nor interfering in
any of the actual management decisions of the PC.

Larry Bensky, host of the Sunday Salon program, appeared and
complained during the public comment period that the PC decision was
made by "Stalinists." Mr. Bensky made no reference to the fact that
it was paid staff who have primarily kept the PC meetings secret and
who were responsible for not informing him of what was going on.
Immediately after making his inchoate negative comments, Mr. Bensky
left the meeting.

Jim Bennett, the interim General Manager, is the person chiefly
responsible for failing to implement the PC decision and forcing the
issue into the LSB arena. Mr. Bennett stated that he felt that the
listeners should be more involved and told of the impending program
change. This was intensely ironic to the listeners in the audience,
several of whom commented that he had not informed the listeners of
the issue, had not published the folio in which information could be
communicated to the listeners, had not offered any assistance with
implementation planning, and had instead merely refused to act on the
decision. If Mr. Bennett had agreed to the change and informed
listeners of the plan months ago, then there would never have been
and need for this special LSB meeting.

Max Pringle of the news department made the most telling remarks
about where the paid staff are coming from. Mr. Pringle stated that
the "problem" was caused by the listener and community members on the
PC who are just "self-appointed guardians of the station with too
much time on their hands." Many listeners in the audience wondered
aloud if Mr. Pringle was aware that those "self-appointed guardians
with too much time on their hands" had been the hands that rescued
both his job and the Pacifica Foundation. Or perhaps Mr. Pringle's
comments were made because he supported the Mary Frances Berry and
Lynn Chadwick leadership and felt his job was secure under them
because he had no personal issue with the direction they were taking
Pacifica Foundation?

Mr. Pringle also said that listeners should stay in there place when
he used the metaphor that listeners were like passengers in a plane,
and he would not want to fly in a plane flown by passengers. This
was a telling remark both in its demeaning of the role of listeners
and in its misrepresentation of the issue. No listeners are saying
how any program should be operated, either technically or content.
The PC decision was made by the unpaid staff reps and the
LSB/community reps agreeing on a time change. The correct metaphor
would be an airline route committee deciding to change the time of
day of the departing flights. Clearly this is a decision that has
nothing to do with flying the plane. The demagogic use of the plane
flying metaphor used to keep listeners in our passenger seats on the
plane clearly communicated Mr. Pringle's unveiled contempt for the
listeners.

The fact that not a single staff person on the LSB or in the audience
challenged Mr. Pringle's comments about the listeners' true place
being passive passengers on the KPFA plane or about listeners
being "self-appointed guardians of the station with too much time on
their hands" shows like nothing else can how the staff continue to
hold listeners in contempt after all that the listeners have done
over the last five years.

Clearly, the writing on the wall that many listeners read in large
print after the Summer of 1999 when the station was reopened after
massive listener demonstrations only to be followed by a deafening
silence from the majority of paid staff regarding the struggle is now
evident to all in the staff attacks on listeners as "self appointed
guardians" meddling in policy decisions better left to those
professionals with radio expertise. This question was best answered
by a letter read during public comment from Robbie Osman who appears
to be one of the few KPFA staff willing to openly stand in support of
the legal reorganization of Pacifica that was fought, paid for, and
won by the presence and active involvement of listeners as "self
appointed guardians." Mr. Osman wrote, "After participating on the
Program Council for a year I am convinced that KPFA must rely upon
democratically chosen representatives from the station's listenership
and the broader progressive community who have no personal interest
in the outcome of programming decisions (beside the interest we all
have in empowering, informing, and inspiring a progressive movement),
to evaluate and ultimately shape KPFA's programming."

Currently, mostly all of the paid staff with a large contingent of
unpaid staff seem nearly united in keeping interactions with
listeners well controlled and unidirectional such that
the "professional" staff make decisions while the listeners merely
get input by providing the money. Mr. Osman seems to be in the
small minority of staff who are willing to be vocal and to take as a
challenge along with listeners the idea of putting into actual
practice in the realm of governance the concept stated by Lewis Hill
of establishing a "creative tension between broadcaster and audience
that constantly reaffirms their mutual relevance."

On the point of the paid staff's derision toward listeners
as "inexperienced" in radio, Mr. Osman made the following cogent
remarks. "People untrained in making radio programs should not be
engineering call-in shows or asked to edit news feeds. But KPFA'S
listeners and supporters are capable of making thoughtful judgments
about whether those call-in shows are covering issues that are of
importance to them and they know whether KPFA's newscasters are
performing up to their standards." Mr. Osman appears to be a rarity
among the staff as someone who is able to articulate the difference
between policy decisions and micro management.

The first resolution which the LSB was considering at this special
meeting was the following.

I. Resolved that:
Whereas, it is the duty of the KPFA LSB: "To work with station
management to ensure that station programming fulfills the purposes
of the Foundation and is responsive to the diverse needs of the
listeners (demographic) and communities (geographic) served by the
station, and that station policies and procedures for making
programming decisions and for program evaluation are working in a
fair, collaborative and respectful manner to provide quality
programming." Bylaws, Article Seven, Section 3.G.

Therefore, the KPFA LSB adopts and approves the programming decision-
making policy and procedure agreed upon by the KPFA management and
Program Council at their retreat on November 18, 2003, specifically:

That programming decisions at KPFA shall be made by the majority vote
of the Program Council, pursuant to the Program Council quorum rules
that a majority of the Program Council members are present, and that
at least one representative each from the paid staff, unpaid staff,
LSB listener members, and community representatives (appointed by the
LSB) is present at the meeting.

Further, the LSB adopts the following policy: The General Manager may
override a programming decision made by the Program Council in the
following cases: (1) legal issues that pose a threat to the broadcast
license, (2) personnel issues where the programming decision
conflicts with a disciplinary action taken by the GM, (3) violations
of the KPFA union contract, and (4) where the GM believes the
decision would cause serious financial harm to the station.

If the General Manager overrides a programming decision made by the
Program Council, the Program Council may appeal to the LSB to
override the General Manager.
******************

There were three amendments made to the above resolution. The first
was to include information to KFCF of program changes being
considered. The second was to adopt general language from the minutes
of the PC retreat minutes. The third amendment was controversial in
that it requires that the PC decisions will need at least two votes
from each "constituency" of paid staff, unpaid staff, LSB members,
and community members to pass any motion in addition to an overall
majority vote. This super-majority requirement gives a "veto" power
to minority. For example if two of the three LSB members vote "no" or
are absent, no decision can be made. Similarity, if three of the
four unpaid staff are absent or vote no then no decision can be made.
Or if three of the four unpaid staff are present but two of them vote
no, then those two can veto any decision.

This amendment was apparently made for the purpose of forcing the
staff and listeners on the PC to work together. However, after the
meeting adjourned as least one LSB member stated s/he didn't
understand the minority veto implications of the amendment. This
amendment may be subject to a motion to rescind it at the next
meeting.

The second resolution was to
II. Resolved that:
In the specific case of the Program Council decision made last
October to move Democracy Now! from 9-10 am to 7-8 am, and to move
the Morning Show from 7-9 am to 8-10 am, which decision the Program
Council reaffirmed on December 16th when it decided the change was to
have been implemented on or about March 9th, the LSB finds that the
time change: (1) does not raise legal issues that pose a threat to
the broadcast license, (2) does not raise personnel issues that
conflict with a disciplinary action taken by the GM, (3) does not
violate the KPFA union contract, and (4) will not cause serious
financial harm to the station.

Therefore, the LSB directs the General Manager to implement the time
change within a reasonable time frame not to exceed four months from
this date.
*********************

This resolution was not reached and will be addressed after the first
resolution is adopted, rejected, or otherwise disposed of, such as
being referred to a committee.

The debate on the first resolution is scheduled to pick up where it
left off at the regular LSB meeting this coming Sunday April 25th at
Noon at The Humanist Hall, Oakland. (390 27th St. Oakland, Between
Telegraph and Broadway, Wheelchair accessible entrance at 411 28th
St.)

Listener's are encouraged to attend and to let their representatives
on the LSB know what there concerns are about these issues. For
example, LSB listener representative Ann Hallatt stated that she
opposed the resolution to endorse the listeners making decisions on
the PC.

Gregory Wonderwheel

[Permission granted to copy - Gregory Wonderwheel]