[Kzyxtalk] Demand for Online Donor List

[Doug McKenty]

I do not know why you lumped me into this. All I have ever asked for is that the station comply with its bylaws by allowing some members to pursue the option of holding a membership meeting.  Agreement of five percent of the membership are required to hold this meeting, which, when held, would constitute a policy making body. 

I would like to hold such a meeting, because I believe there are some serious legal and compliance issues that need to be addressed, and the membership should be appraised. 

The board could solve the problem by putting the question up to a vote during the yearly election. They refuse. So I asked for the membership list, or some way to address the question to the membership, per the bylaws. There solution thus far has been prohibitively expensive, and I do not believe represents the intent of the bylaw. 

The board is refusing to follow the bylaws by coming up with some avenue to hold the membership meeting. My guess is they don't want the membership to know about the legal and compliance issues, and they dont want to hold a membership meeting because that would become a policy making body that supersedes the control of the board. 

Doug

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 8, 2016, at 2:51 PM, smmail <smmail at gotsky.com> wrote:
> 
> So Scott, you demanded that KZYX put their donor list up immediately on the basis of a document that said the station didn’t have to comply until 2018. I am sure that the staff are having a good laugh.
> 
> Further, you didn’t check to see what “donor list” refers to. I easily found the FCC and Cornell law sites that said donors are entities who pay to support the costs of airing specific programs and the list has to record the time and date of the specific program supported. I then checked a couple of law firm sites who advise radio stations of their legal responsibilities, and they said the same thing but elaborated that donors are, essentially, individual program underwriters who are not reported on air. These donors consist of wealthy individuals, foundations, trusts, and corporations who support specific issues or wish to improve their image. To check this, I went to the KQED website to find that their donors lists matched this description.
> 
> My presumption is that what you and Doug want are present and past member’s names and contact information. It would be blatantly unethical for the station to release this information. In this period of concern about privacy, can you imagine the anger, potential law suits, and loss of membership from angry members who are contacted, for whatever reason, because the station released their private information? Also, according to federal law, it is illegal for the station to release this information unless the       members have previously given permission, but there is no requirement that this be done at all. To check these facts, I looked at the membership list policy of several large public radio stations and KQED only releases names of members that have given permission. Further the releases are mediated by a third party who handles the contact (mailing etc.) in a manner that the requesting organization can’t get direct access to the list. The requesting agency has to pay all expenses. Minnesota Public Radio, who have a large number of specialty stations and transmitters, have a policy of not releasing member information at all. You or Doug are not going to get this information from the Station, but if there are a thousand dissatisfied ex members out there it should be easy to find and organize them.
> 
> You say that you have been researching KZYX for three years, but in just a few days of watching I have identified several errors that suggest that you suffer from confirmation bias, which is the bane of all information researchers. This information is very easy to find and you don’t own up to your mistakes. Nobody should trust any of your analyses and your juvenile insults are pitiful. SM
> 
> 
> 
>> On 6/7/2016 5:55 PM, Scott Peterson wrote:
>> Dear Mr./Ms. SM,
>> 
>> 
>> Actually, I did read the document I linked. Here's a direct quote from the last paragraph on page 37:
>> 
>> 
>> "As we proposed in the NPRM and as we required for television broadcasters in the Second Report
>> 
>> 
>> and Order, we will require noncommercial radio broadcasters to include donor lists in their online 
>> 
>> 
>> public files."
>> 
>> 
>> That's straight from the FCC and its individual commissioners. Who don't mind using their names.
>> 
>> 
>> Sincerely,
>> 
>> 
>> Scott M. Peterson
>> 
>> 
>> Mendocino
>> 
>> 
>> https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-16-4A1.pdf
>> 
>> 
>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
>> 
>> 
>> You didn't actually read the document you linked and you have no idea 
>> what is required in a public inspection form. How embarrassing.
>> 
>> This took me a little longer than usual (20 minutes) to find because the 
>> Gov documents site is down. SM
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Kzyxtalk mailing list
>> Kzyxtalk at lists.mcn.org
>> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Kzyxtalk mailing list
> Kzyxtalk at lists.mcn.org
> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/kzyxtalk/attachments/20160608/9c3dcead/attachment.html