[Kzyxtalk] concernin loyalty

[nsi at mcn.org]

Do it! --beth bosk

On Mon, 5 Sep 2016 01:35:38 +0000 (UTC), sako4 at comcast.net wrote:
> Very well-said, Doug.
> Indeed, what is "loyalty"?
> Blind loyalty:
> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=blind%20loyalty [1]
> And loyalty to whom? 
> To listeners? To members? To the community? Or to inept, tyrannical
> management?
> I'm thinking about taking Ed Keller's advice and finally filing my
> grievance over my suspension, so I can nail down this heretofore
> unwritten policy of a "loyalty oath", and sue the station to undo this
> policy.
> -- John
> 
> -------------------------
> FROM: "Doug McKenty" 
> TO: "kzyxtalk" 
> SENT: Sunday, September 4, 2016 12:35:30 PM
> SUBJECT: [Kzyxtalk] Loyalty
> 
> I feel compelled to respond to a post last week from Marco where he
> revealed an email from the current Program Director at KZYX stating that
> the organization was not interested in working with him as they were
only
> looking for volunteers who would, in her words, express a "loyalty" to
> the radio station. 
> 
> What does that mean?
> 
> KZYX is meant to be a community organization that, according to its
> mission statement, produces programming that is open to "all points of
> view." In other words, those with different, and opposing, perspectives,
> should be able to use the station as a communication hub where these
> differences can be hashed out in an open and transparent manner and the
> radio station should operate as a common resource shared by all members
> of the community. The bylaws and policies of the station clearly dictate
> that differences in opinion concerning station governance and
programming
> decisions should be made in a similarly transparent and democratic
> fashion. 
> 
> About 10 years ago, a few entrenched members of the stations hierarchy
> chose to disregard many of these policies in order to enforce upon the
> station a "NPR formula" which minimized the influence of members of the
> community interested in discussing alternative or activist opinions that
> strayed too far from what I would describe as the "NPR worldview." 
> 
> As a result, community support for the station plummeted and the
stations
> net worth dropped from $350k to almost zero. The station has lost an
> average of $3000 a month during that time, despite the fact that the CPB
> grant increased by nearly 100%. (Though the amount has been reduced over
> the last two years.)
> 
> Those who advocated for a return to the democratic spirit expressed in
> the stations policies often coincided with their desire to discuss
> alternatives to the NPRcentric perspectives of those who unilaterally
> took control of the programming were often simply pushed out over time.
> 
> While it seems obvious that many in our community wish to hear more
> alternative beliefs, and the expression of those beliefs on air would
> result in more community financial support for the station, those who
> have taken control of the programming simply accuse those who seek
> democratic change over hierarchical control of disloyalty to the
> institution itself. 
> 
>>From my perspective, those who have taken control of the programming to
> impose their beliefs, at the expense of the rest of the community, are
> the ones who act out of disloyalty to the institution, and those of us
> attempting to democratize the process in order to save the station
> financially, are the ones loyal to the spirit of community radio with
> respect for the shared, common resource it is meant to be. 
> 
> The accusation of "disloyalty" seems to be yet another excuse to silence
> the voices in our community who believe that the radio station should be
> open to "all points of view." 
> 
> Doug
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> _______________________________________________
> Kzyxtalk mailing list
> Kzyxtalk at lists.mcn.org
> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk
> 
> 
> 
> Links:
> ------
> [1] http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=blind%20loyalty