How Did Free Speech TV Manage to avoid the dysfunction that affected Pacifica Radio?

[billrecto]

https://www.freespeech.org/management-team

https://www.freespeech.org/board-members

https://www.freespeech.org/text/frequently-asked-questions-about-free-speech-tv

https://www.freespeech.org/history-future

https://www.freespeech.org/mission-vision-and-strategies

I find it kind of odd that Free Speech TV somehow managed to avoid the same issues that got Pacifica in Trouble. This is especially when Free Speech TV is directly aiming for the Pacifica audience and they have contracts to air Pacifica's TV edition Democracy now with Amy Goodman and David Pakman. I know that Amy Goodman is a board member of Free Speech TV and the co-founder is Jon Stout. Some how these people on this board manages to get the factions (Progressive) and Democrats of Free Speech TV to get organized. I like to see how this network executes plays and how they manage to negotiate with Cable/Web/App companies for transmission. Also how they manages to negotiate with content providers such as Indymedia, Bill Press Westwood One,
Pacifica, Project Censored, The Real News and Wikileaks also Progressive Activist groups. Maybe I'm looking at this from the Guilt by association angle. I know Free Speech TV has to compete against link TV for some documentaries and air Movies that seem to almost meet the PBS POV criteria.


I could be wrong on this but this network FSTV has to deal with the Guilt by Association angle(About Pacifica) just like the way the PBS Board, Propublica, CIR, Fronteras, PRI, APM, NETA, APT, PRX, ITVS and some PBS affiliates that own an NPR affiliate had to deal with when the NPR Board Fired Juan Williams of Fox News for Questionable comments and PBS was attacked in the process by the Tea Party.

 

[FightingIrish]

Just because the ideology is similar does not mean that both are run the same way. Pacifica has a very unorganized, dysfunctional structure, with too many egos not willing to compromise on very much. Plus, they manage some rather expensive broadcast properties. FSTV, on the other hand, seems to have a more traditional management structure and less overhead. They seem to know more about running a business, whereas Pacifica doesn't.

 

[billrecto]

Just because the ideology is similar does not mean that both are run the same way. Pacifica has a very unorganized, dysfunctional structure, with too many egos not willing to compromise on very much. Plus, they manage some rather expensive broadcast properties. FSTV, on the other hand, seems to have a more traditional management structure and less overhead. They seem to know more about running a business, whereas Pacifica doesn't.

I know that Free Speech TV has to negotiate with Directv and Dish in that process and they have to negotiate with underwriters like the Ad Council. Also I knew that the Guilt by association issue was at play here with Free Speech TV I just didn't know how deep it was especially when Free Speech TV had to negotiate with Pacifica Radio over a contract deal with Goodman. I just need some articles looking at how they execute plays and their history.

 

[FredLeonard]

The Ad Council is not an underwriter. The Ad Council is an ad industry group that brings together agency types with non-profit types to produce PSAs.
Pacifica carries Democracy Now. Amy Goodman started it while she was working at WBAI. Now it's an independent production and Pacifica would not be involved in arrangements to carry the show on TV.
Free Speech TV, like any cable channel, negotiates with cable, fiber optic or satellite provider for carriage. Or with Roku and with the public TV stations which carry their programming.
You seem to assume that any progressive media organization must be badly managed just because Pacifica is.

 

[billrecto]

The Ad Council is not an underwriter. The Ad Council is an ad industry group that brings together agency types with non-profit types to produce PSAs.
Pacifica carries Democracy Now. Amy Goodman started it while she was working at WBAI. Now it's an independent production and Pacifica would not be involved in arrangements to carry the show on TV.
Free Speech TV, like any cable channel, negotiates with cable, fiber optic or satellite provider for carriage. Or with Roku and with the public TV stations which carry their programming.
You seem to assume that any progressive media organization must be badly managed just because Pacifica is.

I don't Assume that and I mentioned it on Reply 1 and 3. I mentioned Guilt by association I know that Free Speech TV can work. I just want to make sure my facts are right.

 

[billrecto]

The Ad Council is not an underwriter. The Ad Council is an ad industry group that brings together agency types with non-profit types to produce PSAs.
Pacifica carries Democracy Now. Amy Goodman started it while she was working at WBAI. Now it's an independent production and Pacifica would not be involved in arrangements to carry the show on TV.
Free Speech TV, like any cable channel, negotiates with cable, fiber optic or satellite provider for carriage. Or with Roku and with the public TV stations which carry their programming.
You seem to assume that any progressive media organization must be badly managed just because Pacifica is.

I don't assume that. I happened to see some Documentaries like 9500 Liberty(Immigration issue), Surviving Progress(the pro and cons of civilization), Pricele$$(About Lobbyists), Fracking Movie, Drone Movie and the GMO issue about Monsanto. I saw them and they were good investigative movies on Free Speech TV. I know FSTV 10 years ago aired Indymedia and Independent News and that was a bad show back then.

http://www.davidpakman.com/about/

Well I learned that David Pakman is really an Independent Producer like Amy Goodman is. Its that in the Credits it showed that Pacifica name in both David Pakman and Democracy Now. This is where the Guilt by Association comes into play here between Pacifica and Free Speech TV its the Independent Producers that Negotiate with both of them.

Since I did volunteer at an NPR affiliate I understand that PBS had to deal with Guilt of Associations too when the NPR Directors fired Juan Williams of News for questionable comments on Fox News and the Tea Party went after both PBS and NPR around that time. I understand that PBS is Based in Arlington, Virginia and NPR is Based in Washington DC and are both separate organizations that deal with Public Broadcasting.

I know that FSTV is Based in Denver and Pacifica is Based in Berkeley and they are both separate entities in Progressive broadcasting that happen to attract a similar audiences its that the approaches are different once I look at the evidence closely. See all other that I mentioned.

 

[PTBoardOp94]

The NPR board did not fire Juan Williams. Vivian Schiller did. The board then fired Ms. Schiller.

Other than that, I'm not sure what you're talking about. What "trouble" do you refer to when you speak of Pacifica? The financial problems? If so, that is only an organizational control issue, and any average businessman would realize that FSTV has different management than Pacifica and is at least a little more trustworthy.

 

[billrecto]

The NPR board did not fire Juan Williams. Vivian Schiller did. The board then fired Ms. Schiller.

Other than that, I'm not sure what you're talking about. What "trouble" do you refer to when you speak of Pacifica? The financial problems? If so, that is only an organizational control issue, and any average businessman would realize that FSTV has different management than Pacifica and is at least a little more trustworthy.

Yes Financial issues of Pacifica thats what I am talking about. Also Content of the shows and presentation of the shows thats also a factor I am referring to.