----- Original Message -----
From: Barbara Dane <email@example.com>
Cc: <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <email@example.com>;
<firstname.lastname@example.org>; <email@example.com>; <firstname.lastname@example.org>;
Friday, November 19, 1999 4:39 AM Subject: Response to Dan
To Mark Bevis, Don Rush, Laura Iiyama and Joseph Gill:
Is this a message addressed by you to a
listener/sponsor of one of
the Pacifica stations? If so, my reasons for addressing you go "far
beyond the conflict taking place at ...KPFA." and I ask you to
please reflect on the remarks that follow it:
> TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN.
> DATE NOVEMBER 5, 1999
> WE (80% OF THE STAFF AT PACIFICA NETWORK NEWS)
HAVE SERIOUS CONCERNS
> OVER THE EFFORT TO REINSTATE DAN COUGHLIN AS
PRODUCER OF PNN. ALTHOUGH
> OUR REASONS ARE DIVERSE, THEY GO FAR BEYOND THE
CONFLICT TAKING PLACE AT
> PACIFICA STATION KPFA IN BERKELEY. INTERFERENCE IN
OUR INTERNAL AFFAIRS
> IS NOT WELCOME
> MARK BEVIS
> JOSEPH GILL
> LAURA IIYAMA
> DON RUSH
If it is true that you wrote this statement,
you appear to be
confused over the relationship of listener/sponsors to the Pacifica
stations and network. What one or several or all of us have to say
about what happens on the air can in no way be labelled
"interference in internal affairs."
We are, in fact, the source of your income
(whether through direct
contributions or through our taxes) and therefore your true
employers. We therefore have a right and responsibility to do
whatever is necessary to protect the integrity of your work as
reporters and your freedom to perform it, as well as to demand
accountability from you in what you report.
Dan Coughlin was reporting factually on
occurances that have to do
with every citizen of this country, whether listener or not, since the
whole issue of Pacifica's independence and sovereignty as a medium of
information exchange is at stake and is a test of one of our most
cherished freedoms as a people. The sitiuation at Pacifica is not in any
way internal or private, and that it can be seen that way by any of its
participants is an indication of how severe the present problem is.
The fact that Free Speech and the First
Amendment itself are
under serious attack by the would-be corporatizers now in charge
of Pacifica's governing body is national news if anything ever was.
Coughlin's right and responsibility was to report on it, and the fact that
he was censored for it is the strongest possible proof that there is a
desperate situation going on here.
What "diverse reasons" could possibly deter
understanding this and standing by him? How is it that you don't
understand this to be a direct attack on the integrity of all news
reporters in whatever medium? One can understand the need to
protect one's source of livelihood but can't you see that if you don't
find the courage to stand with him and any others in the situation of
being censored for reporting the truth, you will soon find that life has
lost its meaning?
Dan Coughlin must be reinstated, along
with all others who have
been put under suspension or worse during this crisis. We cannot
surrender the integrity that 50 years of struggle and sacrifice have
built. Please join us in defending your right to report and ours to learn
from your work. Thank you.
PS: May I suggest that you take a couple
of hours and go see a
new film called "The Insider" ? I think you will find that it resonates
with the dilemma you are now facing.