WBAI Local Programming Ceases

[Tibbs4]

It's Null. Why was the link removed?

NULL, as a associated with anyone on the NY "team" of despots is a most appropriate name. I know we keep beating a dead horse, but what logic does anyone associated with
this "situation" have that would think that they could just come in and say and do whatever they want in management or on the air when the actual license holder tell them to
get out? Imagine that happening in any other business.

Still airing all national programming as we roll into Halloween?

 

[davideduardo]

It's Null. Why was the link removed?

The snapshot of the portrait was accompanied by a series of vulgar or profane comments and words that violate the board terms of service.

 

[Tibbs4]

The snapshot of the portrait was accompanied by a series of vulgar or profane comments and words that violate the board terms of service.

HECK David, this entire WBAI charade is indeed vulgar and profane. I can imagine there are those who wish it would disappear like the portrait. Now you have my interest peaked. Must be the Halloween sugar buzz.

 

[Barry]

A judge at NYS Supreme court sided today with the WBAI staff, according to an article in the New York Post. Supposedly, the station may soon resume broadcasting under local control. However, Pacifica management indicated that it will appeal the decision.

Local Programming Returning Soon?: https://nypost.com/2019/11/06/nyc-based-radio-station-wbai-to-go-back-on-the-air-at-midnight/

 

[TheBigA]

A judge at NYS Supreme court sided today with the WBAI staff, according to an article in the New York Post.

Seems to me is the issue is the by-laws. The owner of the station is powerless to actually run it. In fact, the way the by-laws are written, Pacifica can't even sell the station, because the WBAI board members would prevent them from doing so.

 

[Tibbs4]

Would such bylaws not be subject to the rule of law defined by the proper ownership and control of a broadcasting facility as required by the FCC? So, let's just say the locals "back" in control decide to run forbidden content. Do they pay the fine since the owner's are not responsible for anything anymore? They can just scream fire or create chaos at will? The owner's can't say or do a thing. Then again, maybe the good ole FCC rules don't trump the state Supreme Court?

Also, would it now be possible to use the bylaws and court hearing to force the local WBAI to remedy their unpaid financial obligations or be booted off the private property of a certain radio tower, since it's not part of the control of the owners? Seems like Pacifica should just let these clowns run the carnival until the equipment all get broken, checks bounce or the place goes up in flames.

 

[davideduardo]

Seems to me is the issue is the by-laws. The owner of the station is powerless to actually run it. In fact, the way the by-laws are written, Pacifica can't even sell the station, because the WBAI board members would prevent them from doing so.

And that would be a lack of positive control of the licensed station, which could lead to license revocation.The problem is that if this is presented to the Commission in the form of any kind of petition, it would likely jeopardize the license and generate huge legal fees.

 

[TheBigA]

Seems like Pacifica should just let these clowns run the carnival until the equipment all get broken, checks bounce or the place goes up in flames.

That's basically what happened two years ago when the station was millions of dollars behind in their rent to the ESB. Ultimately, daddy had to bail the station out, sign for a loan, pay off the ESB, and move the transmitter to its current location. No payments on the loan were required until October, which is what led to this situation. But yes, it would be very easy for Pacifica to just sit back and wait for the next big debt payment to come due. This time, daddy is already in debt, so he can't come to junior's aide.

 

[TheBigA]

And that would be a lack of positive control of the licensed station, which could lead to license revocation.

I think the licensee has demonstrated that it CAN take control of the station. Just that a local judge won't allow it because of the by-laws.

But you're right that the FCC can call into question those by-laws. Either that or transfer control of the license to the local board.

 

[Tibbs4]

Who on the "local board" can take on the financial ability to meet the FCC obligations? My guess is that the minute the group of mental business giants THOUGHT they all would suddenly become owners of a radio station, they would Jim Jones each other. NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO HAPPEN. March 1st they'll be either off the air or you will never hear from anyone on the local board.

 

[TheBigA]

So somewhere near midnight, the local station returned. But Pacifica still controlled the website, according to this tweet:

"Station's back on the air but @RadioPacifica hasn't given back the website so online listeners can't hear @WBAI. I hope someone can record what's on the air now."

 

[Joylovepulse967]

https://youtu.be/iz6fVs_reX0 At 12 am

 

[Barry]

The takeover of WBAI did not seem to make sense. Even though the audience for the locally produced programming is tiny, at least it generates revenue through on air fund raising.
During the past month, while Pacifica aired national programming over the station, there were no requests for donations over the air. Due to a court order, it had to continue paying the 'BAI staff members that were on the payroll (most are volunteers), apparently for doing virtually nothing. So how was any money being saved through the takeover? Though the Pacifica faction that was running WBAI promised new local shows, it was unclear how they would be funded, as Pacifica's financial situation is about as bad as WBAI's.

Also, I believe the WBAI staff is correct in their claims that one of the station's most onerous recent debts, money that had to be paid for their transmitter location at ESB, was a result of a bad decision by Pacifica. Apparently it was Pacifica that decided years ago to sign a lease with the Empire State Building, at very costly terms, that became a major part of WBAI's debt. I think it was WBAI's management that set the wheels in motion to move the transmission site to the far less costly 4 Times Square location.

 

[TheBigA]

Apparently it was Pacifica that decided years ago to sign a lease with the Empire State Building, at very costly terms, that became a major part of WBAI's debt. I beleive it was WBAI's management that set the wheels in motion to move the transmission site to the far less costly current 4 Times Square.

Nothing at Pacifica is done alone. It was all approved by the board, and WBAI has representation on that board. It was also local's decision to stop paying ESB and ran up the debt, leading to a lawsuit that the station lost. If local had cheaper options, they could have been presented.

 

[davideduardo]

Also, I believe the WBAI staff is correct in their claims that one of their most onerous recent debts, money that had to be paid for their transmitter location at ESB, was a result of a bad decision by Pacifica. Apparently it was Pacifica that decided years ago to sign a lease with the Empire State Building, at very costly terms, that became a major part of WBAI's debt. I beleive it was WBAI's management that set the wheels in motion to move the transmission site to the far less costly current 4 Times Square.

When WBAI originally built the ESB facility, there was no 4 Times Square as the Conde Nast Building did not even open until the year 2000.

I note that WBAI was on the ESB sometime in the late 60's, so they were at that site for over 30 years before the lower Conde Nast building was even finished. WBAI successfully operated from the ESB for decades before it ran into problems... problems caused by its own programming which followed a model listeners no longer were attracted to.

If you are looking for the root problem, it's programming that is vastly out of touch with the times in presentation and format. They are essentially running unrelated podcasts, one after another in short blocks. There is no stationality, no continuity in an era when people do not make appointment listening for short for radio programs. The result was listening in the 0.1 to 0.1 range. There were not enough people ever tuning in to sustain the station.

 

[Barry]

Without a doubt, there is much room for improvement in terms of programming. And I do realise that when WBAI went on the air, decades ago, the Empire State Building was perhaps the only practical option for a Class B FM in this area.
My point is that when 4 Times Square did become an alternative to the ESB as a transmission site, WBAI should have moved to it, as soon as they could (i.e. when their lease with ESB at that time expired). Had they done so, a very significant part of WBAI's recent debt would have been reduced.

 

[davideduardo]

Without a doubt, there is much room for improvement in terms of programming. And I do realise that when WBAI went on the air, decades ago, the Empire State Building was perhaps the only practical option for a Class B FM in this area.
My point is that when 4 Times Square did become an alternative to the ESB as a transmission site, WBAI should have moved to it, as soon as they could (i.e. when their lease with ESB at that time expired). Had they done so, a very significant part of WBAI's recent debt would have been reduced.

The problem is that the current programming structure will not sustain the operations even were the antenna mounted on the roof of a gas station in Newark.

The issue is that the collection of short programs on a grid with dozens and dozens of shows each week is not what listeners need today. Given the success of, particularly, the morning and afternoon shows on NPR, a more consolidated approach where topics are presented by different voices within a structured magazine format is what might work today. But individual shows, with no continuity, in a complex program schedule, will not get listeners.

Nobody will make an appointment for the "Vegans for Sustainable Food Supplies" show at 1 PM on Saturday. But if the spokesperson for that position or area of thought is a guest on occasion in regular programming, the topic gets a broader audience and is interesting to the less passionate about the subject.

WBAI has not bee paying its costs for several decades... about the period of time that the transformative in listening habits and preferences became clear.

 

[Barry]

From a business point of view, these suggestions make sense. However, WBAI considers itself a community radio station. Such stations typically have volunteers come in and do a show or two a week, offering a lot of diversity. As ratings are usually very low, sustaining this is all about funding, and keeping expenses real low.
A comparable station in this area is WPKN, 89.5 FM in Bridgeport CT. They have been a community station for 30 years, without much of the drama surrounding WBAI. Their programming grid has plenty of esoteric shows. But I believe that this (excerpted from the History section of their website) is a key funding advantage they have over WBAI: "WPKN primarily funded itself through its traditional on-air drives. Even though our listenership was loyal and generous, as economic conditions in the 2000’s became increasingly unstable and other local stations relied on professionals to raise funds, our station realized that other sources of income streams were needed. In 2011, after intensive debate, the WPKN constitution was amended to allow underwriting, within guidelines that maintain the integrity of our commitment to freedom of expression, diversity of programming, and the mission to serve and educate our community."

WPKN: https://www.wpkn.org/about/history/

 

[TheBigA]

In 2011, after intensive debate, the WPKN constitution was amended to allow underwriting, within guidelines that maintain the integrity of our commitment to freedom of expression, diversity of programming, and the mission to serve and educate our community."

That's a great observation, and as you probably know WBAI has a policy against accepting corporate or government grants, even though they'd qualify for CPB funding and other underwriting sources. They feel it makes them independent, but in truth it just makes them poor. I don't know any non-coms that can exist only on donations.

 

[davideduardo]

That's a great observation, and as you probably know WBAI has a policy against accepting corporate or government grants, even though they'd qualify for CPB funding and other underwriting sources. They feel it makes them independent, but in truth it just makes them poor. I don't know any non-coms that can exist only on donations.

I didn't think that EMF got much in the way of grants and that its main source of revenue is individual donations, with secondary revenue from investments of excess cash over expenses.