PNB Meeting - Jan 2007 - Executive Director Report

STATION ISSUES

In early 2006, Pacifica stations were experiencing varying levels of turmoil. At WBAI, there were battles between factions, morale problems, and a pattern of missed deadlines and poor communication. At WPFW, disputes centered on the program schedule, whether the Latino community was getting its fair share of the airwaves, a shortage of news and public affairs programming, and the legitimacy of its last elections. At KPFT, activists, African Americans and Latinos claimed that the station wasn’t sufficiently serving their communities. As in New York and Washington, the battle there often spilled over into the Board. At KPFK, the conflict centered on management practices, and at KPFA, a General Manager had just been removed, extending a long-term leadership vacuum.

To better understand the dynamics, I visited stations and met with staff, listeners and members of local boards. To deal with the problems at KPFA, I selected an Interim General Manager from the existing staff, a decision that calmed things down but also left the impression that I was deferring to the so-called “entrenched staff.” In the Spring, my focus shifted to WBAI, where the Interim GM and Program Director were at odds. My strategy was to air the issues and move the principles toward mediation in hopes of finding some common ground. But the dynamics in New York didn’t leave much room for reconciliation, and I eventually concluded that the IGM wasn’t ideally suited for the demands of the job. The situation was further complicated by the prominent role played by the station’s unpaid staff group, USOC, whose three year old agreement with previous management granted it considerable influence, alienated listeners, and disputes between managers about program changes.

Meanwhile, morale at KPFK re-emerged as a problem. Although the station was holding its own financially and its programming approach appeared more dynamic, there was pressure to intervene in disputes concerning the General Manager. At both KPFT and WPFW, factions on the LSBs were mounting new attacks on management, focusing on complaints about unresponsive programming. Then there were the “exiles,” programmers previously removed from the airwaves for some disloyalty or alleged bad behavior. After a year, it has become apparent that most of the underlying problems remain.

As I became familiar with key staff members, as well as the constraints and demands they face, it was difficult to avoid the conclusion that substantial programming change would face resistance. Most managers say that would like to make some changes, but feel that they are judged primarily on the basis of success in on-air fundraising and also face conflicting pressures from their program councils and the community. Further, they hesitate to replace programs with others that don’t have a clearly defined and supportive audience. The argument that there is a demand for national news and public affairs shows, and that they can engender more loyalty, has not been that persuasive.

Despite respect for “local autonomy” as a value, I have concluded that special intervention and national oversight should be an option when solutions do not emerge locally, or when local decisions, division or paralysis place the foundation at risk. (1) Beyond that, Pacifica has a responsibility to listeners and communities beyond the five sister stations, including a duty to offer and project a national editorial agenda and bring local voices to a nationwide audience.

Although I have not required the carriage of any program during the past year, such decisions are appropriate in some cases; for example, programming in support of Board initiatives or sparked by vital public events and national issues. In addition, Pacifica currently allocates significant resources to the production of two national shows. All five stations should be required to air them at reasonable times on a regular basis -- and to actively promote them. Nor should network management have to negotiate with stations for prominent scheduling of Free Speech Radio News, a daily newscast in which we invest significant resources and whose staff we plan to integrate into the network.

In previous reports, I have presented two addition conclusions that bear repetition:

• Pacifica is under-funding technology development. Equipment is aging and needs replacement, and increased use of and dependence on the Internet as a distribution vehicle has not been matched by creative thinking. Investment in technological improvement, transformation, and coordination should be substantially increased.
• Listener loyalty is on the decline at several sister stations. Part of the solution is to create space for new voices, and focus on currently under-served audiences. Specifically, we should nationally showcase successful local programs from our stations and affiliates. To do that, program schedules and mixes need to evolve. Pacifica stations need a fair, impartial, and effective way to set limits on how long programs remain on the air, and an evaluation process that encourages managers and program committees to cooperate, open space, and make needed changes.