[Kzyxtalk] from the AVA's "Mendocino County Today", May 22, 2014

[David]

Hi John S.
 
You've written a number of missives in the last 24 hours, but I have yet to
receive a response to my email (yesterday's email, reprinted below)
requesting that you schedule your "grievance" meeting. It would seem that
once you move forward on presenting your case some of your complaints might
disappear. . . .
 
David
 
David Steffen
KZYX Business Development
(707) 895-2324 office
(707) 322-9895 cell
(707) 895-2451 fax
 
 

Good afternoon John.

 

I read with some interest your latest letter to a local newspaper. In recent
weeks I've resisted any public debate with you over the letter you received
from me more than two weeks ago. It is my opinion that these matters are
between a volunteer programmer and, in this case, the Business Development
person . . . me. Since you first raised the possibility of filing a
grievance, I've been encouraging you to do just that: file a grievance. I've
also been upfront about the rationale for my May 5, 2014 notice to you, a
rationale found within the Volunteer Handbook.

 

Your justification for not reading the underwriting suggests that the timing
of reading underwriting is at the programmer's discretion. In fact it is
not. The handbook and other materials and presentations I've made to
programmers make this rather clear. It was reaffirmed in the updated 2003
handbook, which was and is the programmer's guide to requirements and
responsibilities. (I might add I had nothing to do with writing the handbook
as it predates me by five years.) Please note the following excerpts, with
which you should already be familiar:

 

"RIGHTS, REGULATIONS AND RULES

This section presents summaries of the rights, rules and regulations at
MCPB. Many of the points summarized here are addressed in more detail
further on in this handbook. Programmers assume responsibility for complying
with both MCPB and FCC rules and regulations. A PROGRAMMER WHO DELIBERATELY
DOES NOT COMPLY IS SUBJECT TO DISMISSAL, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROCEDURES
SET FORTH IN THIS HANDBOOK.

REGULATIONS APPLYING TO PROGRAMMERS

A programmer is expected to:

1. be proficient in the operation of all equipment that is routinely needed
during his/her shift, 2. be informed of, and must follow all FCC rules and
regulations, 3. read and understand the contents of this handbook.

4. participate in and abide by conflict resolution and grievance procedures,
as outlined in this handbook.

5. read all underwriting announcements assigned to his/her program clearly
and without ad-libs.

6. keep accurate logs of his/her shift time.

7. air station promos, PSAs and other announcements as requested."

I hope you noticed the passage emphasized in the handbook: "A PROGRAMMER WHO
DELIBERATELY DOES NOT COMPLY IS SUBJECT TO DISMISSAL, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
PROCEDURES SET FORTH IN THIS HANDBOOK."

 

On more than one occasion during 2014, you did not read the underwriting as
scheduled. You're unhappy? Sorry about that but rules are rules. As for your
drumbeat of a potential grievance filing, I've done nothing but encourage
you to file for conflict resolution so we can both put this behind us. In
fact, again referring to the handbook, 

"The first step of the conflict resolution procedure is to hold a discussion
of the problem by the parties involved, clarifying points of disagreement
and agreement, proposing solutions, and if possible, coming to a
resolution." 

 

That seems straight-forward and, as indicated above, I have advocated for
the established procedure for conflict resolution since the beginning. The
handbook does not order or recommend that issues be litigated in the press
or on listserves. You, however, have chosen to regularly misrepresent the
disagreement on various listserves, and in the local press (as well as, I'm
told, in at least one local vanity publication.)

 

I have no interest in a public litigation of your grievance in competing
emails or the press. And please resist the temptation to couch this in "free
speech" terms. If you truly believe that you are an aggrieved party, then
call for a meeting to find resolution. Until then I'm asking that you stop
writing letters to editors, or op-ed pieces, or postings on the listserves.
It's time to embrace and endorse the conflict resolution procedure you
agreed to when you became a programmer. Meet face-to-face. It really is that
simple.

 

David

 

David Steffen

KZYX Business Development

(707) 895-2324 office

(707) 322-9895 cell

(707) 895-2451 fax


  _____  

From: kzyxtalk-bounces at lists.mcn.org [mailto:kzyxtalk-bounces at lists.mcn.org]
On Behalf Of sako4 at comcast.net
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 11:58 AM
To: tbray at wildblue.net; kzyxtalk at lists.mcn.org
Subject: Re: [Kzyxtalk] from the AVA's "Mendocino County Today", May 22,
2014



It would seem obvious KZYX is now trying to develop a policy designed to
kick dissidents off the air...a list of forbidden off-air conduct or
behaviours that would result in the cancellation of shows and the revocation
of broadcasting privileges for the "guilty" broadcaster.


What conduct, I wonder? 


Conviction of a felony crime? Imprisonment?  I can completely understand
being kicked off the air for serious criminal behavior. But KZYX isn't
talking about that.


So, what other conduct gets a broadcaster in trouble, I wonder?


Criticism of station management? Is that enough to get a broadcaster kicked
off the air?


How about other criticism? Criticism of the Board? Criticism of station
policy? Criticism of another broadcaster? 


Hmm.


What other conduct? Where does the slippery slope end?


How about getting kicked off the air for holding controversial opinions?
Holding certain political beliefs? Belonging to certain religions? Belonging
to certain organizations deemed subversive by KZYX station management?
Perhaps even making certain lifestyle choices unacceptable to station
management? 


Sounds like McCarthyism all over again.


Any policy in this area would almost almost certainly be actionable in
court. A policy mandating or regulating off-air conduct would immediately
have KZYX defending itself against claims of reprisals, double standards,
and discrimination. 


If anyone thinks KZYX's legal bills for the renewal of the FCC licenses are
too high now, I shudder to think what defending against such claims in court
would cost in the future.  Station management would bankrupt the station by
trying to mandate or regulate off-air behavior. Almost certainly, none of
the above claims would be dismissed by a judge. The opportunity for making
case law in a constitutional challenge at publicly funded radio station,
like KZYX, would far too compelling. A judge's career is determined by
published case law.


Also, if anyone thinks the objections to the renewal of KZYX's two FCC
licenses drew a spark of national attention, then creating a policy for
required off-air conduct would almost certainly create a firestorm of
controversy. I don't think many other public media stations would support an
attempt by KZYX to mandate or regulate off-air behavior. 


Talk about unpopular!


Does KZYX really seek further negative publicity? 


I can also see Congress getting involved, too. In  the1990s, Congress got
involved at the NEA over what constituted freedom of speech issues. Congress
then went way beyond getting involved.  In 1995-1997, Congress almost killed
the NEA, along with the NEH and the CPB.


Incidentally, there is some relevant case law from that time. The case filed
by the "NEA Four" in 1993, with lead plaintiff Karen Finley, centered on
subsection (d)(1) of 20 U.S.C. § 954 which provides that the NEA Chairperson
shall ensure that only excellence and merit are the criteria by which
applications are judged. The court ruled in 524 U.S. 569 (1998), that
Section 954(d)(1) is facially valid, as it neither inherently interferes
with First Amendment rights nor violates constitutional vagueness
principles. 


In other words, it can be inferred that only criteria by which
publicly-funded broadcasters would be judged would be the same criteria that
publicly-funded artists are judged...excellence and merit. 


That me state that again. If public dollars are involved, then only
excellence and merit matter.


Again, the courts have already decided this issue in the area of publicly
funded art. No doubt the courts would jump at the chance for a test case in
the area of publicly funded media.


The NEA, NEH, and CPB all have interests that are aligned. For the same
reason the NEA pushed back in the 1990s, I also don't think the CPB would
sit still for a code of required off-air conduct. I don't think they would
sit still for one minute..


Then, there are the conservative groups who would be ready to pounce on us:
Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute, the Project for a
New American Century, and others. They're always ready to pounce on public
television and public radio at almost any opportunity. A code for required
off-air conduct would be like waving a red flag at a bull. They couldn't
resist it.


But there's more. Even liberal groups would be concerned about the free
speech issues implied in a code for required off-air conduct at a public
radio station like KZYX. 


I was once married to a national reporter who was also a Carter Center
Fellow. Yesterday, after following this thread about  off-air conduct on
kzyxprogrammers at lists.mcn.org, I spoke with someone affiliated with the
Carter Center. Together, we made a list of all the groups who would be
aghast at a code of required off-air conduct. They include not just many
liberal groups, but also libertarian groups, like the Annenberg Public
Policy Center. I then asked another person who has been a guest on my show,
and who is a prominent and highly-respected media person, to put a call into
Annenberg to get a read on this dubious business of a code for required
off-air conduct. I'll ask that person to poll a few other places, too.


KZYX may be small, but our issues are big.

  _____  

From: "Tim Bray" <tbray at wildblue.net>
To: kzyxtalk at lists.mcn.org
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 10:04:59 AM
Subject: Re: [Kzyxtalk] from the AVA's "Mendocino County Today", May 22,
2014


The KZYX programmer's listserve is buzzing, and it started off with a
question about whether or not off-air actions should be considered when
evaluating a programmer.  Some thoughtful commentary about the programmer's
position ensued.  

But the real buzz is the pushback from programmers who are sick of Sacowicz
and his bullshit.  He is getting roundly castigated by several programmers,
and some others are expressing genuine concern for his mental state.  

Sacowicz is, as usual, responding with threats of legal action and heaps of
self-aggrandizing rhetoric.

The "criticizing station management" mantra is BS and a red herring.
Programmers question and criticize station management all the time, with no
repercussions.  I can think of many who do it regularly and are treated with
respect; I have done  it myself on several occasions, and undoubtedly will
again.  

What Sacowicz is doing is beyond criticism.  Protesting the relicensing has
demonstrably harmed the station and continues to do so.  It seems a clear
violation of his duty as a Board member and he should be recalled - but that
would require wasting even more time and money.


 

On 5/22/2014 1:04 AM, sako4 at comcast.net wrote:


=============================

THE KZYX LISTSERVE is buzzing with a discussion about tightening up the
station’s Programmer Handbook as to how a programmer might lose his air time
to include how he might lose it off-air. Off-air? Off-air. Which seems to
mean criticizing station management in forums other than “Free Speech Radio,
Mendocino County” itself where, of course, discussion of the station is not
allowed on-air. But off-air? That might be a little much even for Philo’s
intrepid “speakers of truth to power.”

=============================



_______________________________________________
Kzyxtalk mailing list
Kzyxtalk at lists.mcn.org
http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk

  _____  

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4577 / Virus Database: 3950/7513 - Release Date: 05/17/14

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/kzyxtalk/attachments/20140522/b64f822f/attachment-0001.html