--- Begin Message ---
http://muckraker-gg.blogspot.com/2008/04/practical-idealism-pacifica-
realities.html
April 28, 2008
Part six of "Managing Pacifica: In the Bubble."
Practical Idealism & Pacifica Realities
by Greg Guma
Meetings of Pacifica Radio's National Board rarely provide sufficient
time for sustained reflection. With 22 members from across the
country vying to be heard, plus the restrictions imposed by Roberts
Rules of Order, unrealistic time limits and an irresistible tendency
to delve into operational details, discussions can be bewildering and
inconclusive.
Nevertheless, during the January 2006 meeting in Washington DC I
tried to describe what I was seeing and hoped to do about it as the
new executive director. "Shortly after accepting this job," I
noted, "I talked with a dedicated Pacifica supporter who at one time
also considered going after this position. From what I knew, this
person seemed well suited for the work. So, why didn't you apply? I
asked. The reply was revealing: `Well, I wanted to work again.'"
It was supposed to be an amusing ice-breaker for my first ED report,
but there was a serious point, the difficulty of working in such a
highly charged environment.
Getting down to specifics, I ran through the issues that had emerged
during my first days on the job ? the Board's decision to launch a
national Spanish language show, the future of national programming,
the need to reach an agreement with FSRN, as well as CPB standards,
direct mail plans, and diversifying revenue by taking advantage of
the potential for new satellite and Internet channels. After talking
with the HR Director, Yolanda Thomas, I'd negotiated a minor office
reorganization that gave her a private room for confidential
discussions. We'd also worked out a new hiring process and agreed
that the long-overdue adoption of a "code of conduct" would be
necessary to address many of the problems that led to conflict and
litigation.
Moving on to diversity, a central value within the community, I noted
that it wasn't just needed to secure public funding. It influenced
Pacifica's election process, staffing decisions, and programming to
reach underserved communities. And that led back to the mission.
Everyone talked about it, of course, but after 57 years and dramatic
changes in media, not everyone saw it the same way. My recommendation
was to "revisit" the idealistic statements Lew Hill had penned back
in the 1940s, find out where people agreed and differed, and
hopefully reach consensus on why Pacifica was a vital part of the
21st century media landscape.
That didn't end up happening. But in the moment, while sketching out
hopes and visions in those optimistic opening days, I suspended my
skepticism and convinced myself that it might be possible to prevent
the exploitation of what looked like a bold experiment in media
democracy, to stop it from becoming "an excuse for demagoguery, or a
war of attrition in which the loudest voices and those with the most
time can simply wear the organization down." Mission-driven
programming, fair employment practices, a culture of cooperation,
financial transparency and effective management that treated people
with respect ? maybe Pacifica could still get there.
Was I being naïve? Probably. As I tried to explain, in the months
ahead "the public may read or hear some strange things about what is
happening at Pacifica ? reports that sound disturbing, even
dangerous." That looked unavoidable. Nevertheless, I asked people to
think about it this way: "Those who issue harsh, even cruel judgments
will really be telling you more about themselves than the foundation
and its work. They will be appealing to people's fears, assumptions,
and projections about what THEY might do if they were in our shoes.
The truth is: they're captives in a nightmare."
The idea was to acknowledge the fears, but then say, "Wake up. Most
of it just isn't happening." How to prove it ? that was the real
question.
On Sunday morning, during an executive session, I had an early
opportunity. Discussing the specifics of what transpired during
closed door meetings would violate my pledge upon taking the job.
However, many of the issues debated there do eventually find their
way onto blogs and into the public domain. So, let me put it this
way: Board members wanted to know about a recent financial
settlement, one that some of those involved preferred not to discuss.
Since I knew the details, sharing them with the group felt like the
thing to do.
The impact of the revelation was immediate, effectively telegraphing
that things might change after all, that management and the board
didn't have to be at odds and real "transparency" was actually
possible. It also made me some enemies. By challenging the notion
that it was all right to keep board members in the dark, I was
suggesting that the organization's covert power structure might be
exposed. And, in refusing to be cowed by those who defined every
issue on the basis of race, I was saying that the days when guilt
trips and demonization effectively ended a discussion could be coming
to an end.
Pacifica's "bold experiment" in democracy had some obvious flaws. But
maybe the soft despotism of self-interest ? that degrader of
democracy, imagination and free thought Alexis de Tocqueville
identified almost two centuries ago ? might not be inevitable. Then
again, it was difficult to overlook what I'd learned only hours
before during a trip to the DC Radio Coop.
That outing had been arranged by Sam Husseini, an intense media
watchdog who made contact at the start of the weekend. Sam worked
with the Institute for Public Accuracy as communications director and
had chaired WPFW's Local Advisory Board during Pacifica's hijack
days. He was a tough critic of both national management and the DC
station's shortage of public affairs programs. The way he saw it, the
network was missing golden opportunities to ask tough questions in
the nation's capital. He was especially upset that the one person
with a show who challenged the "Washington Consensus" at White House
briefings, Russell Mokhiber, editor of the Corporate Crime Reporter
newsletter, had been repeatedly preempted on WPFW and ultimately
cancelled.
Located at the Al-Fishawy Café in northwest DC, the Radio Coop has
since become a fully-functioning community center. A collective that
produces alternative content, it also works with groups like FSRN,
the Capitol District's Independent media center and local radio
stations, and provides training and production facilities for local
media activists. In late January 2006, however, its home base was
still under construction in a cavernous basement below the cafe.
Sam introduced one of the founders, Ryme Katkhouda, a feisty
organizer of Syrian descent who had begun producing and training at
WPFW in 2003. Though she still produced a show, her relationship with
the station had turned sour during a turf battle between volunteers,
contract workers, and unionized staff. Some said the real issue was
her Arab nationality, and one Black local board member, attorney
Thomas Ruffin, charged that it was part of a pattern of
discrimination. The station's Black manager Ron Pinchback, with the
acquiescence of the local station board, was driving away talent and
perhaps even breaking the law, he claimed.
By the time we arrived, a heated discussion was underway. Three
members of the national board, WBAI delegates who were members the
Black-led Justice and Unity Coalition, had stopped by on a fact-
finding mission. For the next hour Ruffin, Katkhouda and Thomas
Gomez, another disaffected local producer, detailed their case.
Passed over for promotions and jobs, Katkhouda and Gomez said they
had become targets of workplace harassment aimed mainly at non-Black
immigrants. The underlying charge was racism ? specifically, lack of
inclusion -- at the predominantly Black-managed and focused station.
Two weeks later, Katkhouda filed a complaint with the DC Office of
Human Rights charging that WPFW had subjected her to
discrimination "based on her ethnicity, national original, race, and
gender."
This wasn't the only legal fight on the horizon. A female prison
guard in Houston was talking to her lawyer about an on-air remark
made during a KPFT show, New York radio journalist Robert Knight was
threatening legal action after being dismissed, KPFA program
coordinator Vini Beacham had approached the Department of Fair
Housing and Employment about comments by local board members he
considered slanderous, and a lawsuit had been filed by former KPFA
producer Noelle Hanrahan, claiming gender discrimination by
Flashpoints host Dennis Bernstein and unlawful termination by the
station. Added to all that, the struggle inside WPFW made the
obstacles impossible to ignore.
It would take more than altruistic sentiments and a commitment to
transparency to bring peace to this place.
- Greg Guma
Comments welcome at:
http://muckraker-gg.blogspot.com/
--- End Message ---