----- Original Message -----
From: Barbara Dane <bdane@webtv.net>
To: <donrush@pacifica.org>
Cc: <mbevis@pacifica.org>; <liiyama@pacifica.org>;
<jgill@pacifica.org>;
<mgarcia@pacifica.org>; <vabrown@pacifica.org>;
<bdane@igc.org>;
<epearlag@jps.net>; <amyg@pacifica.org>;
<dbernstein@igc.org>;
<jab@tucradio.org>; <savepacifica@igc.org>;
<lynnchad@aol.com>;
<mfberry@sas.upenn.edu>; <robbie@robbie.org>;
<isilber@jong.com> Sent:
Friday, November 19, 1999 4:39 AM Subject:
Response to Dan
Coughlin
situation
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
you from
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.
Barbara Dane
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.
|