NPR Board Welcomes Four Newly Elected Members

[billrecto]

http://news.****************/cgi-bin/rol.exe/headline_id=n27983

They Are Fabiola Arredondo,Kerry Swanson, Howard Wollner and Chris Boskin.

Heres a good one a former VP for Starbucks is here. The rest are media consultants managers of NPR affiliates and from investment firms.

 

[FredLeonard]

NPR keeps giving audio "product placement" to Starbucks (and to Apple). Not surprising somebody from Starbucks is on the board.

By the way, elected by whom? The so-called "member stations" want your money but "members" don't get to vote for the board. It's a closed club; a tight little elite group of one-percenters who go to the same places, know the same people and belong to the same clubs. It's like the House of Lords. And they, in turn, select the NPR board and the NPR board keeps the rotating door of NPR senior management spinning - hiring and firing and then hiring and firing again.

 

[TheBigA]

You want millions of station members to vote for the NPR Board of Directors? Really? How would they do that?

 

[billrecto]

You want millions of station members to vote for the NPR Board of Directors? Really? How would they do that?

Millions of Stations members on the NPR Board or the PBS Board That cannot happen because if they really did that then NPR and PBS could end up on the dysfunctional end having to negotiate with the far wing and faction supporters. NPR and PBS could move the board and management to the center with this setup and thats it. I'd rather see big donors, GM's of affiliates and consultants negotiate on a deal without polarization.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

By the way, elected by whom? The so-called "member stations" want your money but "members" don't get to vote for the board. It's a closed club; a tight little elite group of one-percenters who go to the same places, know the same people and belong to the same clubs. It's like the House of Lords.

PURE Democracy seldom works well for tasks that must function effectively.

Just about every church, civic club, AND OUR OWN government starts out with the masses electing some officers. But organizations that thrive then turn around and let a committee select people to be on a board that selects a committee that hires someone and charges them to "get the job done!"

If you want to see something that should be in the dictionary as the picture for the word DYSFUNCTIONAL, go into some rural area. Find a small Baptitst church or other church that functions as a pure democracy. Read their minutes for the last 25 years. It can be a lesson is 'group dynamics'.

 

[TheBigA]

Let's look at the commercial model for a minute. As a stockholder in a company, one of my main roles is to vote for the Board of Directors. However, my choices come from a pre-selected list of people who have already been approved. Typically, when I look at that list, I don't actually know most of the candidates. They provide bios to help, but I don't have a lot of information to make my choice. It's not like these candidates are campaigning for my vote. That doesn't happen.

I think the same thing would happen if you open NPR Board voting to the station members. The place for their input is at the station level. When I ran a station, we had many tiers of members, based not only on amount of donation, but also on amount of involvement. Those who attended our local Board meetings, who took part in planning our fundraisers, who had ideas for running the station were in a different tier from general paying members. The active members were the ones who might get elected to our local Board. So even at the station level, pure democracy is hard to manage.

 

[billrecto]

Let's look at the commercial model for a minute. As a stockholder in a company, one of my main roles is to vote for the Board of Directors. However, my choices come from a pre-selected list of people who have already been approved. Typically, when I look at that list, I don't actually know most of the candidates. They provide bios to help, but I don't have a lot of information to make my choice. It's not like these candidates are campaigning for my vote. That doesn't happen.

I think the same thing would happen if you open NPR Board voting to the station members. The place for their input is at the station level. When I ran a station, we had many tiers of members, based not only on amount of donation, but also on amount of involvement. Those who attended our local Board meetings, who took part in planning our fundraisers, who had ideas for running the station were in a different tier from general paying members. The active members were the ones who might get elected to our local Board. So even at the station level, pure democracy is hard to manage.

Lets not go down the Pacifica route where dysfunction lives on. Where the board members are factions of left wing.

 

[TheBigA]

Ultimately the Board of Directors at any company, even a non-profit, isn't about politics. The Pacifica situation is unique. And even there, the Board isn't elected by the station membership.

 

[billrecto]

Ultimately the Board of Directors at any company, even a non-profit, isn't about politics. The Pacifica situation is unique. And even there, the Board isn't elected by the station membership.

Sorry about that rant I actually volunteered for an NPR Affiliate in Sacramento Cap Public radio. The Way its done is that they separate the volunteers from the management. As far as I know the people on the Cap Public Radio board are the GM of Cap Public Radio, The Sales reps/marketing from NPR, PRI, APM, PRX and the Trustees of Sacramento State University.
Usually they would go on one room while the volunteers like me are ghost writing "Thank You for your Donations" in the other room with the volunteer supervisor giving phone calls to VP, and other management members there to send notes to Board members if they are on another assignment.

 

[FredLeonard]

Once again, BigA twists things and then argues against his twisted version.

What I said was station members (people who give money) should elect the station board.

I have said previously that NPR should be free from control by member stations and that stations should not elect board members nor be represented on the board. Stations buy NPR programming. That gives them enough influence.

 

[TheBigA]

Once again, BigA twists things and then argues against his twisted version.

What I said was station members (people who give money) should elect the station board.

I understand what you said. My question (which you ignored) was how would that happen? In point of fact, station members (people who give money) currently don't vote for their own local station boards. Why should they have that right for a national syndication service?

 

[FredLeonard]

I understand what you said. My question (which you ignored) was how would that happen? In point of fact, station members (people who give money) currently don't vote for their own local station boards. Why should they have that right for a national syndication service?

I don't know. I didn't say they should. Apparently you don't understand what I said.

 

[TheBigA]

I don't know. I didn't say they should. Apparently you don't understand what I said.

Read what you wrote. You said "they should." Maybe you don't understand what you said.

 

[FredLeonard]

Read what you wrote. You said "they should." Maybe you don't understand what you said.

You lie. Let me try to make this so clear even you can't twist it. Station members (people who gave money above a specified amount in a given year) should elect the station's board. Station board. Get it? Station board. No donation without representation.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

I think we have two problems in this thread. When I read Message #10 and following, I get the idea that "we should mean should when we would write the word should". You two guys go back and carefully read those five posts over and over and over again and the see if the conversation can become functional again.

The second problem is one I never thought all that much about: How board members are nominated, elected, selected for not-for-profit organizations in our society is all over the board. In reading this dysfunctional conversation something has dawned on me: Some NCE stations apparently have very "small d" democratic structures and the person who comes down as a volunteer at every event when refreshments need to be served, when phones need to be answered is also considered a MEMBER regardless of donations, if any, and maybe has some 'voting power'. Something I had never thought of: apparently some NCE stations consider anyone who gives less than say $1,200 per year is considered a "nobody" with no voice in the direction of the station. After all, we all know that only people who give $2,000 or $20,000 or $200,000 per year have sense enough to know who can guide the station.

Is that what all this is about? Or have I set the bar too low? Only if you have given a million dollars to the station should you be able to have a voice in who manages the station and who picks the programming?

 

[TheBigA]

You lie. Let me try to make this so clear even you can't twist it. Station members (people who gave money above a specified amount in a given year) should elect the station's board. Station board. Get it? Station board. No donation without representation.

This thread is about the NPR Board, not the station Board. Station Boards have nothing to do with the NPR Board.

But once again, how would they do that?

 

[TheBigA]

Is that what all this is about? Or have I set the bar too low? Only if you have given a million dollars to the station should you be able to have a voice in who manages the station and who picks the programming?

If you give any amount of money to something, aren't you already voting for something? Voting with your pocketbook? Otherwise, why would you give money to something you don't like?

 

[FredLeonard]

Most people don't vote. The figures I've seen show about eight per cent of public radio listeners have ever pledged. Since most station money comes from advertisers - I mean "corporate underwriters" - those are the only votes that count.

From the press releases I've seen when somebody is appointed to station board positions, the boards primary - maybe sole - concern is fund raising. Not programming. Not personnel.

People contribute would be more accurately called "marks" - not members.

And for public radio stations to claim they are different from commercial radio or any other business enterprise is blatant hypocrisy.

The original post was about the NPR board, which is chosen by A-Reps, who are chosen by station boards. I broadened the topic. That's what happens in discussions.

 

[TheBigA]

From the press releases I've seen when somebody is appointed to station board positions, the boards primary - maybe sole - concern is fund raising. Not programming. Not personnel.

The role of a Board of any organization, be it non-profit or profit, is fiduciary. That's explained in the articles of incorporation. But the other reason you have a board is for inclusion of community leaders, and that's often to satisfy the FCC. Being on a Board (and I've been on two) isn't fun. It's not for day to day operations. It's about long term strategy and finances. Yes, fundraising. Building an institution. If you want to affect station programming, the way to do it is call in and pledge during a particular show. That's how you vote. Being on a board is a serious responsibility. You need responsible people who are dedicated to the mission, and representative of the local community. Most Board meetings are open to the public. We used to publicize them on air and invite members to attend.

Same with NPR's Board. They need responsible people who can be held accountable if management can't meet payroll. That's their job. So if Board members come from the wealthy 1%, it's because someone has to be the adult in the room. Too bad Congress isn't as responsible.

 

[uncamark]

And besides, we've seen what happens when non-com radio station boards are "democratically elected" with the whole Paciifica mess. Not exactly an endorsement of the concept.