<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-forward-container"><br>
<br>
-------- Original Message --------
<table class="moz-email-headers-table" cellpadding="0"
cellspacing="0" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">Subject:
</th>
<td>Re: [Kzyxtalk] Local vs syndication</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">Date: </th>
<td>Sun, 18 May 2014 22:36:15 -0700</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">From: </th>
<td>BC <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:omni@mcn.org"><omni@mcn.org></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">To: </th>
<td><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:kzyxtalk@lists.mcn.org">kzyxtalk@lists.mcn.org</a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<br>
<big><font face="Times New Roman"><big><br>
</big><b>In agreement with this</b><big><i> </i></big></font></big>string
of thought, I'd mention that it is logical that<br>
most individuals in management will choose the safer method even
though it was <br>
more capital intensive. Syndicated copy is just that. Local
programming is just a <br>
nuisance for those involved in the reliability of program stream.<br>
Regarding process of determining the public desire, that is again
a matter of<br>
(new) community process and, in my opinion must be
open/transparent and etched <br>
into the management of the station - forever. I suspect that
regional meetings are <br>
necessary just to determine the questions to be asked.<br>
The open process, in my opinion, is necessary not just to wring
$$$ out of the listeners, <br>
but to facilitate the changes coming in our culture. Radio is the
only way to continue the <br>
dialogue that will lead to enlightened communities necessary to
move into the future. ~BC<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/18/2014 8:55 PM, Diane Paget
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:5379809F.6090808@mcn.org" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Doug,
I would agree that changing demographics is only part of the story. Not
sure where you live, but in Anderson Valley where I live, although there
are young back to the landers too, we have been swamped by yuppies.
If not demographics, why do you think that local public affairs
programming is being replaced by syndicated programs and edgy
programming replaced by bland? (if anyone doubts that statement, I'd
suggest getting an archived Beth Bosk show -- if there are any -- and
comparing it with Paul Lambert. And yes I know that Paul is much easier
to work with than Beth, but sometimes we have to work with difficult
people in order to have interesting radio).
Diane
doug mckenty wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Ok,
A lot to get around to.
The construction of the PAC was interesting. One member elected by the
board, one by the programmers and one by the community advisory board.
These people were to get together with the program director and
choose three more according to a matrix of needs. The seven member
committee makes programming decisions by consensus, though
if consensus is not found the pd gets the last word. Any conflict
should be reviewed by the grievance process. I thought it was a good
start. My sense of the story is that it started off pretty strong but
the air went out of the tires when word came down after John C. became
general manager and the decision was made that the consensus of the
group was not binding, and the group was only advisory in nature.
That interpretation of the documentation won the day and, neutered of
any real power, the PAC because redundant because there was already a
CAB. That is the story as I have interpreted it from speaking
with people who were involved.
About the NPR question. Tim, will you please stop referring to people
who prefer news sources different from NPR as "NPR haters." As one of
them, this attitude feels caustic and I am afraid will only work to
continue to alienate the large percentage of Mendocino county
residents who feel as I do. Also, I want to know why many at the
station feel that someone is trying to eliminate NPR. Where is this
coming from? Paul Lambert accused me of the same thing, trying to
eliminate NPR. Where did he hear it? The only time I ever heard
anyone speak publicly about eliminating NPR was Annie Esposito at a
board meeting where she advocated eliminating NPR and keeping the news
department. She pointed to KMUD as a successful example. Please let
me know who these people are who have advocated for this other than
Annie, so I can let them know I think it would be a terrible idea.
Also, though I appreciate your research, could I ask you to take it
one step further and remove the programs that are musical in nature.
Will you compare the daily dose of locally produced public affairs
programs vs. the dose of NPR or other "canned" news sources. I don't
think the music programming is a much of an issue here as this
communities ability to hear locally produced programs about national
and international issues that give us an alternative perspective from
NPR.
One more thing about the demographics issue. I swear I have heard
this notion that our radio station can't be "hippie" because too many
"yuppies" have moved in, about ten times in the last two weeks. In
most instances there was the hint of sadness at the passing of an
age. I am forty one years old and my wife and I and all my friends
who did not grow up here moved here because we wanted to get back to
the land and we wanted to raise our children in one of the most
progressive communities in our country. I have not seen indications
of yuppie invasion in my community nor any indication that more canned
material or NPR has led to many large donations from these people.
Conversely, I do think a show about marajuanna might improve our
ability to find such donors. I for one hope that the old hippies will
not give up...
Wait, there is more. The PAC is not designed to satisfy everyone, it
is designed in part to create a public forum where critical
individuals can go to complain. This not only takes the onus off
staff, which would alleviate a lot of unnecessary stress, but provides
a venue where the complaint can be listened to in a transparent way.
I think having the program application review process become
transparent would eliminate a lot of the issues that come up. And
giving those critical of current policy the opportunity to apply for
the committee if they are passionate also gives them the hope that
if others agree, real change is possible. The function of the PAC is
to neutralize the negative energy of the complainer, not an effort to
please everyone. That is impossible. Though most Public radio
stations have no such committee and allow the program director
control, many Community radio stations, of which KZYX is one, do
employ such a committee as they find it helps reduce conflict.
Doug
On Sunday, May 18, 2014, Tim Bray <<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:tbray@wildblue.net">tbray@wildblue.net</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:tbray@wildblue.net"><mailto:tbray@wildblue.net></a>> wrote:
Diane,
As you note, the demographics have changed. And as a friend of
mine says, "It ain't Hippie Radio any more."
If Doug is correct and half the listeners are "hardcore NPR fans"
and half want more local shows, how can any process or committee
reconcile those opposing views?
How could a PAC be constituted in a way that satisfies everyone?
This is the question I have been unable to answer.
Tim
On 5/18/2014 3:36 PM, Diane Paget wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> A lot of what Doug says in this post reflects my experience of the
station since it first went on the air. I used to be a very active KZYX
volunteer, hosted a month public affairs segment for a while, helped my
kids host Rubber Biscuit, wrote and tallied the first two listener
surveys, helped in pledge drives. Then my life got busy and I didn't
have as much volunteer time. When that kind of time returned to my life,
I went back to see if I could help the station out again and found the
atmosphere much more defensive and less welcoming to volunteers. I'm
still a member because I do listen sometimes and I wouldn't want to go
back to what it was like before KZYX, but I listen a lot more to KPFA
and give them more money because I like their programming better.
One of the things that has changed in the past 25 years is the
demographics of KZYX's listeners. In 1990 a greater percentage of the
station's members were people who moved here in the 70's and 80's as
young hippies, back to the landers, political activists and mom and pop
pot growers -- the kind of folks who like the homemade feel of locally
produced community radio. As more baby boomers have retired or
semi-retired here from urban areas and university towns, where they were
accustomed to NPR type public radio stations, there is more acceptance
of (and maybe even a preference for) syndicated shows. Unfortunately
those folks who have moved here from the city in the past 15 years have
lots more money to contribute to the station than those of us who have
lived here since the 70s. So if you are running the station as a
business or even if you are just trying to pay off a lot of debt, there
is going to be a tendency to let the money speak. But the station
started in debt and paid off that debt while providing lots more local
(and edgy -- don't forget the Beth Bosk had a show for years)
programming and half an hour of locally produced news.
A PAC might be able to address the problem of local vs. syndicated
programming if it had the authority to make decisions and there was a
mechanism in place to ensure that the members of the committee were
representative of the membership of the station. The recently restarted
Station Advisory Board members seem to have been hand picked by members
of the Board and maybe the staff. If there isn't a fair, transparent
process for selecting the members of the PAC, it could be just window
dressing.
Doug, do you know if the FCC regs or the station By Laws say anything
about one? What does the current board policy that created the
Programming Advisory Committee say about how it will be selected and
what its powers would be?
The PAC has come and gone over the years. It would be interesting to
look at that history and see why it failed, when it did.
Diane
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""> --
Oak & Thorn <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://oakandthorn.wordpress.com"><http://oakandthorn.wordpress.com></a>
Facebook: Oak and Thorn
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Kzyxtalk mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Kzyxtalk@lists.mcn.org">Kzyxtalk@lists.mcn.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk">http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
_______________________________________________
Kzyxtalk mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Kzyxtalk@lists.mcn.org">Kzyxtalk@lists.mcn.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk">http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<br>
</body>
</html>