Review of Williams' firing completed, Weiss resigns

[TheBigA]

I expect the result of this is that news employees will be barred from holding outside jobs and doing commentary for other news shows. That actually should have been the policy, and none of this would have happened.

 

[flashback]

I expect the result of this is that news employees will be barred from holding outside jobs and doing commentary for other news shows. That actually should have been the policy, and none of this would have happened.

that could very well be and if it was the case i would understand williams fireing.

 

[OKCRadioGuy]

"This is disgusting. Schiller stays and makes Weiss the scapegoat." Amen on that. Schiller was in charge of the place when all this happened. She needs to go...

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

"This is disgusting. Schiller stays and makes Weiss the scapegoat." Amen on that. Schiller was in charge of the place when all this happened. She needs to go...

I guess that is a decision that the Board of Directors have on their plate. Is it possible that most of what Schiller has done that upsets people expressing their views here has been carried out on instructions of the BOD? Does everyone assume that Schiller has an unlisted phone number and the members of the board cannot reach her?

 

[MattParker]

"This is disgusting. Schiller stays and makes Weiss the scapegoat." Amen on that. Schiller was in charge of the place when all this happened. She needs to go...

I guess that is a decision that the Board of Directors have on their plate. Is it possible that most of what Schiller has done that upsets people expressing their views here has been carried out on instructions of the BOD? Does everyone assume that Schiller has an unlisted phone number and the members of the board cannot reach her?

From what I have read, Schiller at least approved - possibly instigated - Williams' dismissal.
Schiller probably did not tell Weiss to call Williams and fire him on the phone.
Nobody consulted the board of directors as a group or as individuals before Williams was fired.
Schiller did not consult the board before commenting on Williams psychiatrist.
If Weiss had waited until Williams came in and fired him in person, the same fall-out would have occurred.
Schillers' comment about Williams' shrink shows that in PC-Land, anybody who doesn't share their views must be somewhat crazy. It appears Weiss couldn't wait to ax Williams and that reflects the PC mind-set, too.
What REALLY has the board upset is the Williams' firing cut into pledges at many stations. If fund raising - the primary purpose of public radio stations - hadn't been affected, they couldn't care less about Williams getting fired and as PC types, themselves, probably would have liked that he got dumped.
So, Weiss has to take the fall for cutting into recent pledge drives. Schiller loses her six figure bonuses and is now on thin ice.

NPR must be reorganized. It can not function effectively as a new organization as long as it is beholden to the government for tax money (direct or indirect) and to local station managers worried about funding (government funding and pledges) and protecting their "rusty towers." It needs to be independent, not only to cover news, but to deal with internal management issues effectively and to move NPR into 21st century technology.

 

[TheBigA]

The kneejerk reaction is to fire the coach. That's not always the right thing to do. Until a week ago, no one outside of NPR knew who the VP of News was at NPR. Her name wasn't mentioned in October. Everyone's already formed their opinions about the CEO. So it seems an easy decision for people on the outside with no real knowledge to fire the CEO and cut federal funding. That's the reality TV game we all love to play. Vote some poor slob off the island.

The real challenge in being a CEO is to solve problems. What the Board is saying here is "This is your mess, now clean it up." That can be a lot more challenging than simply getting fired. If there are Congressional hearings on the bill to defund, she may wish she had been fired. You certainly don't fire the person who was in the center of a controversy while it's still happening, because her successor is stuck dealing with the fall out. I don't know about you, but I certainly would not want to walk in the middle of this movie. Same with the News VP. Not a job anyone would want at this point. They're better off with an Acting VP until the dust settles.

From what I have read, Schiller at least approved - possibly instigated - Williams' dismissal.

What you've read? You mean the rumor and gossip? Come on. The actual investigation wasn't released to the public. That's all that matters. Schiller is a relative newcomer to NPR. She doesn't know Williams' history. It's not her decision to make. If I was the head of news, I would be offended if some CEO dictated who I could hire or fire. So I doubt very much that she "instigated" his firing.

NPR must be reorganized. It can not function effectively as a new organization as long as it is beholden to the government for tax money (direct or indirect)

I think you're once again throwing out the baby with the bathwater. NPR is a big organization, and this is a very small issue that has been blown way out of proportion for obvious political reasons. The news department needs some improved guidelines. Those guidelines exist at other organizations, and had they been in place, this problem would have been averted. There is no such thing as being "independent." Everyone is "beholden" to someone. It's either the government, the stations, or sponsors or the stockholders. And realistically, no organization can effectively deal with 21st century technology with sole funding from donations. Ask the folks at Pacifica.

 

[DG]

...What REALLY has the board upset is the Williams' firing cut into pledges at many stations...

That's only part of it. The timing was bad for another, and perhaps even more damaging reason- it occurred just over a week BEFORE the national election.

Both Fox and NPR (especially Viv) turned it into a major news story, and essentially made ending CPB funding a Conservative mandate in the days leading up to the election.

I agree that it appears Weiss had it in for Williams and it was her decision to fire him. I question how much involvement the Board or Viv herself had in that matter beyond supporting her decision to fire him. It is obvious to me that neither Viv nor the Board supported the manner in which it was handled, that being left up to Weiss. That she chose to handle it in the way she did I think shocked many. And it is also obvious to me that she didn't consult with anyone about the manner in which it should have been handled, nor the timing of it. Viv's highly inappropriate comments immediately thereafter just added more fuel to the fire and placed her in the crosshairs at Fox.

The NPR Board is comprised mostly of station GMs. I doubt anyone of them, regardless of the market size, fundraising success or format of their station, would have approved of either the handling or timing of this. Especially the latter since it was pledge-week for most stations, and also a crucial news period just prior to a major national election. An election that was already hyped for the supposed political change it was predicted to bring. So I yell BS to those who say the Williams' firing couldn't have been handled at a different time.

If he had been fired several weeks later, would there have still been fallout? Absolutely! But not to the same extent I think, especially with regards to killing CPB funding. I believe the bad timing before the election resulted in NPR handing the Republicans exactly what they needed to make killing CPB a politically viable option. Had the firing occurred after the election, I doubt the Conservatives could have made it an issue, let alone a viable one.

That it happened during pledge is a short-term problem that has pretty much died off. But the potential political impact of it is a much different matter, and perhaps has much longer-lasting consequences for both the stations and the network...

 

[TheBigA]

I believe the bad timing before the election resulted in NPR handing the Republicans exactly what they needed to make killing CPB a politically viable option.

By the same token, if it IS strictly a political decision, then it will be DOA. Congress created NPR. You can't create something and then not fund it. So as long as Congress has created something known as NPR, it will still get federal funding. Simply amending the Communications Act of 1934 doesn't deal with the federal system that was created in 1967.

 

[MattParker]

Williams getting fired only is an issue because it became politicized. It was politicized by wing-nuts who are always looking for any excuse to attack NPR. People get fired in radio all the time and usually the way it's handled is much worse than how Weiss handled it. Just about anything NPR does is going to be politicized as long as it receives government money. If the government weren't in the picture, this would be just another how-somebody-got-fired radio war story.

Sure you can create something and not fund it. It's called unfunded mandates and the feds do it all the time; lots of strings attached to an empty money bag.

Pacifica does not solicit corporate sponsors. Not that they could do it every effectively given the anti-corporate tone of some of their programming. But public radio does pretty well at sales. They don't need pledges and they don't need government money. They should be required to do without both.

 

[TheBigA]

Williams getting fired only is an issue because it became politicized. It was politicized by wing-nuts who are always looking for any excuse to attack NPR. People get fired in radio all the time and usually the way it's handled is much worse than how Weiss handled it. Just about anything NPR does is going to be politicized as long as it receives government money. If the government weren't in the picture, this would be just another how-somebody-got-fired radio war story.

That's wishful thinking. These folks have it in for NPR, and it's clear in what they say that it's all about politics, and not about funding. If government funding was not in the picture, they'd find some other button to push. But the fact is that government funding IS in the picture, it was required by law, the Congress sought to de-politicize it by requiring it two years in advance, and the Republicans are not going to get Elmo and Big Bird defunded because of Juan Williams. That's the reality of the situation. There's a difference between an unfunded mandate, and defunding an existing mandate. Two very different issues. Also you keep talking about how "public radio does well at sales," while ignoring that 85% of public radio stations are NOT doing well at sales, and have various limitations placed on them in that area by their licensees. So before you make grand statements about how hundreds of radio stations operate, please take a few minutes to review their budgets.

 

[MattParker]

That's wishful thinking. These folks have it in for NPR, and it's clear in what they say that it's all about politics, and not about funding. If government funding was not in the picture, they'd find some other button to push. But the fact is that government funding IS in the picture, it was required by law, they sought to de-politicize it by requiring it two years in advance, and the Republicans are not going to get Elmo and Big Bird defunded because of Juan Williams. That's the reality of the situation. There's a difference between an unfunded mandate, and defunding an existing mandate. Two very different issues.

Chicken and egg. Politics and funding.
I don't Rush, Fox and the rest getting their shorts in a knot about Bill Press, Stephanie Miller, Thom Hartmann, Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow, Randi Rhodes, MSNBC or Dial Global the way they do about public radio.

 

[TheBigA]

Doesn't matter. More people listen to public radio than all those folks. If Bill Press was popular, you'd have a point. More people listen to All Things Considered than watch MSNBC, CNN, and Fox put together.

Radio or TV talk shows have nothing to do with legislation, and that's what it will take. The legislation is directly tied to politics, which is why the Democrats will stear clear of it. In fact only 32 House Republicans are in favor of Lamborn's bill. The Republicans will need Democrat votes to kill Obamacare. They have a choice on which federal program they want to kill. Can't kill 'em both. At this point, this bill won't even come up in Committee.

 

[TheBigA]

By the way, you say people haven't gotten their shorts in a knot about MSNBC. But I've seen reports where some people have said that a wrench could be easily thrown into the Comcast merger with NBC Universal just because a few people are unhappy with a certain host at MSNBC. You think that threat didn't get some attention around 30 Rock? I've read numerous books about the networks where their Presidents were threatened with the loss of their O&O licenses if they didn't tone down their reporters. Bill Paley got a phone call from LBJ. The editor of the Washington Post, Ben Bradlee, was threatened by people in the Nixon administration with the loss of his company's TV licenses. So this is nothing new. So removing government funding doesn't remove the threat that a broadcast license requires the approval of a government agency. And that is a bigger threat than cutting funding.

 

[MattParker]

By the way, you say people haven't gotten their shorts in a knot about MSNBC. But I've seen reports where some people have said that a wrench could be easily thrown into the Comcast merger with NBC Universal just because a few people are unhappy with a certain host at MSNBC. You think that threat didn't get some attention around 30 Rock? I've read numerous books about the networks where their Presidents were threatened with the loss of their O&O licenses if they didn't tone down their reporters. Bill Paley got a phone call from LBJ. The editor of the Washington Post, Ben Bradlee, was threatened by people in the Nixon administration with the loss of his company's TV licenses. So this is nothing new. So removing government funding doesn't remove the threat that a broadcast license requires the approval of a government agency. And that is a bigger threat than cutting funding.

Bradlee and Paley didn't cave. Public radio does and to far less of a direct threat. And those threats were about news content. Not about personnel matters.

 

[TheBigA]

Bradlee and Paley didn't cave. Public radio does and to far less of a direct threat. And those threats were about news content. Not about personnel matters.

We're talking about the threat. You claim that eliminating federal funding eliminates the threat. I disagree. The threat is always there.

I don't know that public radio "caved." Their lack of policy regarding outside work was wrong, and they knew it. They responded to what their investigation told them. Not to what Congress or someone in government demanded. The resignation of one administrator hasn't removed the threat or changed the situation, as Rep. Lamborn himself said. In the final analysis, the problem people like Lamborn have with NPR isn't one person who got fired or how it happened, but the fact that they dislike and disapprove of their news content and how popular it's become. So it IS about the content, and about influencing the public.

By the way, the difference between Paley and Bradlee is that Paley DID cave. He removed serious news from prime time, forced Ed Murrow to resign, and replaced quality programming with Green Acres.

 

[MattParker]

By the way, the difference between Paley and Bradlee is that Paley DID cave. He removed serious news from prime time, forced Ed Murrow to resign, and replaced quality programming with Green Acres.

Removed serious news from prime time? You mean like that show with the ticking stop watch?
Ed Murrow resigned because Kennedy offered him the position of head of the US Information Agency (which included the Voice of America). Murrow still had a prime time show, Person to Person, when he left CBS. He had a nightly radio news broadcast and was still doing CBS Reports documentaries.
The audience and the critics liked Green Acres. It was funny then. It holds up well and is funny now. I like Green Acres. You got a problem with that?

None of these things you mention happened because some official called Paley and told him to back off. Paley made programming decisions in the best interests of the company. He did pretty well. In those years, typically nine of the top 10 shows were on CBS. A disproportionate number of classic shows which are still being shown from that era were on CBS.

 

[TheBigA]

Ed Murrow resigned because Kennedy offered him the position of head of the US Information Agency (which included the Voice of America).

Murrow's career at CBS was done long before the Kennedy offer. He knew it and so did everyone else. Fred Friendly said so in his book. Murrow's friend Paley deserted him in 1958, and left him to hang on the vine. Murrow left Person to Person in 1959, two years before he resigned. By 1960 the writing was on the wall.

All this is a distraction from the main point, which is that removing federal funding doesn't make public broadcasting "independent." It's wrong to say it will, and also wrong to say that public broadcasting doesn't need federal money.

 

[MattParker]

Ed Murrow resigned because Kennedy offered him the position of head of the US Information Agency (which included the Voice of America).

Murrow's career at CBS was done long before the Kennedy offer. He knew it and so did everyone else. Fred Friendly said so in his book. Murrow's friend Paley deserted him in 1958, and left him to hang on the vine. Murrow left Person to Person in 1959, two years before he resigned. By 1960 the writing was on the wall.

All this is a distraction from the main point, which is that removing federal funding doesn't make public broadcasting "independent." It's wrong to say it will, and also wrong to say that public broadcasting doesn't need federal money.

Fred Friendly's is not the only book on the subject. Friendly had a temper and was unwilling to accept the financial realities of the broadcasting business and of working for a network seeking to build a mass audience. He was a documentarian who wanted to force feed his product. Others, including Don Hewitt and Gary Paul Gates, tell a somewhat different story than Friendly and George Clooney. Murrow understood the realities of television. He understood prime time eventually became too valuable to continue a low rated program which had lost its sponsor to continue in prime time. It was Friendly who had a hissy-fit.