Vivian Schiller Creates Member Station Backlash

[TheBigA]

So discussing how Vivian Schiller's antics have impacted the funding of public radio is 100% on topic.

BS. The people who fund public radio aren't religious zealots who target individuals and want to hold them personally responsible. The people who love public radio will continue to fund it regardless of the rhetoric, and the polls clearly show that to be the case.

 

[JimmyJames]

Just so we're clear:

Those of you who are against the funding of NPR and the horrid liberal ravings of stations like KAXE think that the affiliates that choose to carry NPR programming should be suffering because NPR chose to fire Juan Williams?

 

[MattParker]

Some people have been against government funding of public radio all along, on general principle.

The issue here is the listeners who don't want to donate after the firing of Juan Williams. From personal experience, some member stations can be pretty arrogant and treat listeners with something akin to a "mother knows best" attitude. So, just expressing an opinion doesn't work. How else are listeners who are unhappy about something supposed to get management's attention and be taken seriously? A kick in the pocketbook can be pretty effective.

And in public radio local stations are not just affiliates who choose to carry NPR programming. They are members. They fund NPR (largely). And they elect NPR's board. To get NPR's attention, get member stations' attentions.

 

[DG]

...And in public radio local stations are not just affiliates who choose to carry NPR programming. They are members. They fund NPR (largely). And they elect NPR's board. To get NPR's attention, get member stations' attentions.

Easier said than done. The member stations and the network have had an "interesting" relationship over the years. The way things stand now, the A-Reps (essentially the GMs) at each station are not likely to vote in blocks large enough to change anything at the network. NPR knows this and so do the stations. The annual A-Reps meeting in D.C. was scaled back many years ago and relatively few GMs attend it now because of the costs involved. So few attend in fact, that there hasn't been a quorum for some time. This has caused some issues with NPR, because until recently, lots of things required majority approval by the A-Reps. NPR managed to do a "cyber vote" a few years ago with the A-Reps to amend the bylaws which allows the network greater autonomy. It appears this is coming home to roost now.

The bottom line is that this Juan Williams action has hurt several stations, and done little more than sully the image of NPR. It has however pointed out to many of us in the system how inept NPR leadership has been of late. Unfortunately, there's very little that member stations can do about it.

 

[drt]

One of the latest buzz words is de-fund (in other words take the funding away or don't authorize it in the first place.)

If NPR is de-funded with the reason being that proponents of de-funding don't like their politcal stance, that is one thing............. but if the reason given to de-fund NPR is because of the huge deficit, which people seem to be very concerned about these days (as opposed to not caring in the mid 2000's) then Congress will also have to consider de-funding Radio Marti and VOA as well; otherwise it looks like a political agenda as opposed to fiscal concerns.

Myself I would miss VOA, it has already suffered many cuts, but if it were to disappear completely I would miss it as a source of national and international news.

drt,
st. petersburg

 

[amfmxm]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but "de-funding" NPR (and/or CPB and presumably PBS) would result in converting these "public" services to "independent" services--essentially cutting them loose. As most (though not all) NPR member-stations are on non-commercial frequencies, there is the presumption that those stations would need to remain NC operations. But for those on commercial frequencies--and all PBS TV stations--conversion to commercial channels could be simple and quick. The hunch here is that the NAB would fight such a scheme tooth-and-nail and line up enough members of Congress to kill it. Combine the NAB with the millions of upscale (read: political donors) NPR/PBS fans and it's a no-go from Day One.

On the other hand, does all this Schiller-Williams crap give the rightwing talkers something to hammer on for the next few months-and-or-years? Sure.

Which is why if sweet Vivian possessed just an ounce of common sense she would have let the immediate snafu pass quietly and then, down the road when Mr. Williams' contract was up for renewal, simply elect not to renew--requiring no reason, no statement and no uproar.

 

[Talk_Dude]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but "de-funding" NPR (and/or CPB and presumably PBS) would result in converting these "public" services to "independent" services--essentially cutting them loose. As most (though not all) NPR member-stations are on non-commercial frequencies, there is the presumption that those stations would need to remain NC operations. But for those on commercial frequencies--and all PBS TV stations--conversion to commercial channels could be simple and quick. The hunch here is that the NAB would fight such a scheme tooth-and-nail and line up enough members of Congress to kill it. Combine the NAB with the millions of upscale (read: political donors) NPR/PBS fans and it's a no-go from Day One.

On the other hand, does all this Schiller-Williams crap give the rightwing talkers something to hammer on for the next few months-and-or-years? Sure.

Which is why if sweet Vivian possessed just an ounce of common sense she would have let the immediate snafu pass quietly and then, down the road when Mr. Williams' contract was up for renewal, simply elect not to renew--requiring no reason, no statement and no uproar.

There are plenty of non-commercial enterprises that do not accept government funding, and the strings that accompanies it. Frankly, I think that non-commercial stations that hooked their fundraising efforts on the theme, "We won't accept tax money so that we can be indpendent", might discover that they receive much more in the way of local contributions.

 

[TheBigA]

I think that non-commercial stations that hooked their fundraising efforts on the theme, "We won't accept tax money so that we can be indpendent", might discover that they receive much more in the way of local contributions.

I don't think the folks at Pacifica would agree. They don't accept tax or corporate money and they make far less than the NPR stations in the same towns.

 

[amfmxm]

I don't think the folks at Pacifica would agree. They don't accept tax or corporate money and they make far less than the NPR stations in the same towns.

That is true. However, Pacifica also limits its income severely by refusing to accept corporate underwriting. Given their markets--NYC, LA, SF, DC and Houston--they'd be rolling in the dough if it wasn't for those damn principles getting in the way!

 

[uncamark]

And just to go back to KAXE:

From the time I've been able to go onto their web site and look at their schedules, they've always seemed to be a helluva lot more local than many NPR stations in small markets. Perhaps it's the advantage of being one of the few NPR members in that state that isn't MPR, but of all of the stations that carry "Morning Edition," it looks like they carry *less* of "ME" than any NPR station in the country (it's officially listed as just as part of "The KAXE Morning Show"). I'm guessing that many mornings they just run the newscasts and the A blocks for each hour, if that much. They run more local programming in morning drive than any major market NPR station that sends its morning people to "ME Boot Camp" to "localize" the feed.

And even though they seem to going toward formatted/playlisted AAA the rest of the day (with "World Cafe" twice a day), they still seem to be much more local than your typical NPR station--and of the A list weekend programs, they only carry "Car Talk."