These shameless hucksters are at it again. This time they've sunk to a new low. During programs a large sign held by two smiling idiots appears in the lower left hand corner. It says Support WHYY and gives a phone number. How do these creeps expect to raise money by interfering with programming? The latest report I saw on the CEO's salary is that as of 2015 Bill Marrazzo gets $580 thousand a year. How much of the contributions go his way? No matter how much or how little that doesn't disguise the fact that this latest offensive money grab scheme is a classless and blatant unconscionable act. They have no shame. I hope everyone who sees this agrees with me and never give them so much as a penny.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Another disgusting tactic from WHYY 12
- Thread starter cyber
- Start date
No one's forcing you to watch. The CEO makes his money by selling sponsorships to large corporations, not from members. Membership is becoming a smaller part of the pie.
Of course no one forces me to watch. That's no excuse for this con man type behavior. The next time you're watching a favorite show just think how you would feel if a large sign came up asking for money. It happens four to six times an hour. These disgusting people deserve nothing! Membership should become smaller and smaller if these tactics continue....and it's a sure bet they will.
That's the deal you make with public TV. Get used to it. A lot of web sites now have pop up ads that bypass ad filters, and some sites won't let you view content unless you shut off your ad blocker. Surveys show that viewers won't donate unless they're harassed. Even then, only 7% of those who watch will donate. The rest are complainers like you.'
The interruptions only happen during pledge weeks, and they're only 3 or 4 times a year. The rest of the time, the programming is uninterrupted. Compare that to commercial TV.
Last edited:
Many of the cable channels have promotional pop-ups. A few even have pop-up commercial Ads.
It's bad enough to sit through five and six minute commercial breaks ..... only to be followed a couple of minutes later by a pop-up promo.
The pop-ups all started when Leitch introduced their "Logomotion" device in the late 1990's. The Logomotion gave stations the ability to insert a semi-transparent (ghost) logo, called a "bug," in the corner of the TV screen.
It grew from there. The ghost "bugs" got brighter and less transparent. Then they became animated and larger.
It's bad enough to sit through five and six minute commercial breaks ..... only to be followed a couple of minutes later by a pop-up promo.
The pop-ups all started when Leitch introduced their "Logomotion" device in the late 1990's. The Logomotion gave stations the ability to insert a semi-transparent (ghost) logo, called a "bug," in the corner of the TV screen.
It grew from there. The ghost "bugs" got brighter and less transparent. Then they became animated and larger.
I don't consider a large sign that begs for support "uninterrupted." These pledge weeks you're so fond of go on for weeks several times a year. A couple years ago the station did warn that the begathons would be longer due to lack of funds. I don't have a problem with all the begging during announced weeks. PBS gets virtually no help from the government, I understand it's only two percent of their budget, but to continue during regular programming is disgraceful. I and anyone else who is angry at this underhanded tactic has every right to,as you put it complain.
It's bad enough they do like everyone else and toss show promos up in the corners but a large sign???? unforgivable! My understanding of the consistent logo presence is because of the plethora of channels the stations want to make sure you know what you're watching. That took some getting used to but it's not all that hard to live with.
I stand by that channel 12 is shameless in their huckstering and I probably will take your advice and stop watching. There are other ways to get the few worthwhile programs if you're willing to wait a while. I'll say again, I urge everyone not to donate as much as a penny...ever!
It's bad enough they do like everyone else and toss show promos up in the corners but a large sign???? unforgivable! My understanding of the consistent logo presence is because of the plethora of channels the stations want to make sure you know what you're watching. That took some getting used to but it's not all that hard to live with.
I stand by that channel 12 is shameless in their huckstering and I probably will take your advice and stop watching. There are other ways to get the few worthwhile programs if you're willing to wait a while. I'll say again, I urge everyone not to donate as much as a penny...ever!
All that does is increase the number of pledge drives. They'll keep asking until you break down and give. And if you don't, they'll put on more infomercials in place of regular shows. So there is no upside to not donating. They have the right to exist.
I'd prefer a pop-up to an extended begathon.
Public broadcasting's problem is they tell us how "pure" and uncorrupted they are - unlike commercial broadcasters - and it is pure hypocrisy. They set a standard for themselves and ignore it.
What I find most "disgusting," are all those infomercials passed off as programming.
No such thing as a "right to exist."
Public television programming is available online, without pop-ups or pledge breaks.
Public broadcasting's problem is they tell us how "pure" and uncorrupted they are - unlike commercial broadcasters - and it is pure hypocrisy. They set a standard for themselves and ignore it.
What I find most "disgusting," are all those infomercials passed off as programming.
No such thing as a "right to exist."
Public television programming is available online, without pop-ups or pledge breaks.
Sure there is. Just because freeloaders don't want to pay for what they watch doesn't mean these stations have to shut down and die.
By your standard, most people are "freeloaders." The percentage of the audience that become "members" has hovered around eight percent for decades. That's 92 percent freeloaders. Plus all the people who don't watch public television. Nobody is required to support public television. If they don't like "freeloading," they can go to a subscription model like HBO.
Businesses fail all the time. Businesses dissatisfy customers one at a time, just as channel 12 has dissatisfied OP. Channel 12 is not "too big to fail." Neither is any other station.
Actually they can't legally. The FCC doesn't allow OTA TV stations to operate as subscription operations.
People are cheap. That's their right. Just because people are cheap doesn't mean public stations can't ask for money.
The station hasn't "dissatisfied" the OP. He was watching the station. So he likes the programming. He just doesn't want to pay for it.
If the cheap people are offended by the methods being used, they have the right to watch something else. But don't blame the TV station for doing it's job. Anyone who provides a product has the right to expect payment. The OP wants something for nothing. Too bad for him.
Last edited:
The way I read the original post, his objection was to the pop-up - not fund-raising, per se.
The problem with public television trying to present itself as a class act is people will expect them to act like a class act.
OP didn't say they can't ask for money, or even that they shouldn't. He doesn't like the way they go about it. If people don't like the ad (or the salesman at your door), they don't buy.
Who says public TV has to remain OTA? CTW has already abandoned rusty towers TV.
If he was a member, he could tell the station directly, and it might have impact. Instead he rants on a message board. What does that say?
This isn't about salesmen or ads. It's about paying for the service you use. Seems like a fair exchange to me. The OP is watching the show, and refusing to pay. I guess he resents being made to feel guilty. The solution is watch something else. No one will bother you, and the station will get their money from someone else.
No one says "public TV has to remain OTA." However, the OP watches that way, so the least he could do is pay for what he watches. As I said, he obviously likes their programming and their platform. This station, like many other PBS stations, has tried to be unobtrusive in its fundraising, but it doesn't work. So they have to turn up the gas a bit more. Had the soft approach worked, they would not have had to resort to the stronger stuff. You think people LIKE begging for money? No. But if they don't, people won't give. Sad reality about cheap people.
Last edited:
I don't care how many begathons they have. That's what the mute button on the remote is for. I will always object to the sleazy tactic of a large pop up. To channel 12 I say,"Get out of my face!" That's no way to encourage any donation. There are a number of ways to avoid the hucksterism and watch PBS shows elsewhere. That's what I'll be doing from here on out. They want to insult me with their trickery they'll never get a dime from me or anyone I know. I proudly wear the title Cheap as a badge of honor.
Let's face it, you wouldn't give them a dime regardless of what they do. Expecting payment for services rendered is not hucksterism. It's normal business practice.
You probably resent the collection tray when it comes around at church. That is, IF you go to church.
Wrong! It's not about paying for a service you use. It's about a charitable donation. That's why money given to public television is tax deductible (minus the cost of the premium).
I didn't realize you were such a fan of public television that you would feel compelled to impugn the motives of anyone who offers criticism of it or its tactics.
If OP were to keep sending money, they'd have even less reason to listen to his objections. Why change; he still pledges. Not that elite board and the water department bureaucrat who mismanages the station ever listen to anybody else. But I will agree on point: He'd do better sending his complaints to the station itself.
It's my experience that people who work the begathons like begging for money, at least in that context.
Public Television has changed greatly since 1963 when WHYY-TV went first on the air on Channel 12 with humble studios in Philly [seems like they eventually moved into the old WFIL studios at 46th and Market Sts which was a major upgrade] and the old small red brick schoolhouse at 5th and Scott Sts in Wilmington for their Delaware programs.
They operated on a shoestring budget. They had old used TV cameras and equipment [kind of like WILM had at their old 12th and French Street location before moving to their new studio near New Castle]. Today, Channel 12 has state of the art stuff in a magnificent building in center city Philly and a modern studio at 8th and Orange Sts, in Wilmington. What caused me to stop donating, a number of years ago, was when I heard how much the CEO was making. According to the original poster here said: "The latest report I saw on the CEO's salary is that as of 2015 Bill Marrazzo gets $580 thousand a year." Seems way excessive for a non-profit station. My guess is the CEO back in those early years of Channel 12 was not living like the rich and famous. The difference is, the commercial folks aren't asking you to donate your hard earned income to support their lavish lifestyles as it appears now to be the case with today's Public Broadcasting.
I surly don't begrudge them getting good equipment, but it seems that working in Public Broadcasting isn't the "vocation" it used to be where you'd make far less than your commercial broadcasting competitors.
On the other hand, maybe the CEO's of Channel's 3,6,10, 17,29, and 57 are all making a million + each, I don't know, but a mid 6 figure salary seems excessive for Channel 12's CEO. So does anyone know how much the CEO's of Philly's commercial TV stations are making?
They operated on a shoestring budget. They had old used TV cameras and equipment [kind of like WILM had at their old 12th and French Street location before moving to their new studio near New Castle]. Today, Channel 12 has state of the art stuff in a magnificent building in center city Philly and a modern studio at 8th and Orange Sts, in Wilmington. What caused me to stop donating, a number of years ago, was when I heard how much the CEO was making. According to the original poster here said: "The latest report I saw on the CEO's salary is that as of 2015 Bill Marrazzo gets $580 thousand a year." Seems way excessive for a non-profit station. My guess is the CEO back in those early years of Channel 12 was not living like the rich and famous. The difference is, the commercial folks aren't asking you to donate your hard earned income to support their lavish lifestyles as it appears now to be the case with today's Public Broadcasting.
I surly don't begrudge them getting good equipment, but it seems that working in Public Broadcasting isn't the "vocation" it used to be where you'd make far less than your commercial broadcasting competitors.
On the other hand, maybe the CEO's of Channel's 3,6,10, 17,29, and 57 are all making a million + each, I don't know, but a mid 6 figure salary seems excessive for Channel 12's CEO. So does anyone know how much the CEO's of Philly's commercial TV stations are making?
WHYY-TV went on the air in 1957 on channel 35 (when hardly anybody had TVs that could receive UHF). It picked up the channel 12 license in 1963 and moved to 46th and Market the same year (before that they were in WCAU's old building in Center City). Back then it was "educational television." Public television came about in 1970 and non-commercial stations became inter-connected for the first time (allowing actual network feeds to multiple cities).
$580,080 is Marrazzo's base salary, not including deferred compensation, bonuses and expenses. Various estimates put him in the neighborhood of a million bucks a year. Compensation figures for commercial station managers are hard to come by but the former Fox 29 manager is now managing WXPN (University of Pennsylvania public radio). Marrazzo's salary is based on total fund raising, not just pledges but corporate sponsors and program sales. They get money from the government and they don't pay taxes. So, they have a big fancy building on prime real estate on Independence Hall, the latest and fanciest equipment and enough money left over (after compensations) for various for-profit subsidiaries. Public television is big business. Maybe the old WILM would still be around if they'd converted to a non-profit corporation and did pledge drives.
$580,080 is Marrazzo's base salary, not including deferred compensation, bonuses and expenses. Various estimates put him in the neighborhood of a million bucks a year. Compensation figures for commercial station managers are hard to come by but the former Fox 29 manager is now managing WXPN (University of Pennsylvania public radio). Marrazzo's salary is based on total fund raising, not just pledges but corporate sponsors and program sales. They get money from the government and they don't pay taxes. So, they have a big fancy building on prime real estate on Independence Hall, the latest and fanciest equipment and enough money left over (after compensations) for various for-profit subsidiaries. Public television is big business. Maybe the old WILM would still be around if they'd converted to a non-profit corporation and did pledge drives.
I do remember NET National Educational Television. I didn't realize the NET affiliates weren't connected via network feeds. Thanks for the additional background info. It sure does sound like Public Broadcasting is indeed big business now. Very different from the NET early days of Channel 12's rebirth in 1963.
I visited the 5th and Scott Sts studio, one afternoon after school. The Delaware Tonight newscast set was essentially the only thing in this room. Sid Shaw, the one man news staff was there getting ready for the newscast. A very low tech operation. No film footage, etc. He used Polaroid photos that were projected up on a screen [Channel's 3,6,10 were doing far cooler stuff had a far better looking set, etc]. The newscast was in Black and White and was a 15 minute newscast that came on at 6:15pm after the kids show The Friendly Giant. So yep, things have definitely improved for Channel 12 since 1963.
I visited the 5th and Scott Sts studio, one afternoon after school. The Delaware Tonight newscast set was essentially the only thing in this room. Sid Shaw, the one man news staff was there getting ready for the newscast. A very low tech operation. No film footage, etc. He used Polaroid photos that were projected up on a screen [Channel's 3,6,10 were doing far cooler stuff had a far better looking set, etc]. The newscast was in Black and White and was a 15 minute newscast that came on at 6:15pm after the kids show The Friendly Giant. So yep, things have definitely improved for Channel 12 since 1963.
Ah, yes. I hadn't thought about Friendly in a long time. It was a CBC show that was extremely popular in Canada and never really caught on in the states. NET is still around. They don't operate the network. They do operate the largest "member station," WNET 13, New York (plus WLIW 21 on Long Island and the New Jersey Public Television stations including channel 23) and they are one of the biggest program producers for public television. Unlike NPR, PBS does not produce any programs itself. They just distribute shows produced by member stations and independent producers. But yes, before PBS (with the exception of one experimental program) educational television relied on video tapes (sometimes) and kinescopes (mostly) bicycled from station to station. "Misterogers Neighborhood" (only one "R" originally), "The French Chef" and "Washington Week in Review" started as NET shows. (Actually, Mister Rogers started as a CBC show and he returned to Pittsburgh when NET picked up the show.)
- Status