(the tape begins as the discussion is in progress)

Pat Scott: …one is that, uh, one, talking about the contract that went out to the affiliates

(simultaneous conversation in the audience) …

Robert McChesney (moderator) ...yeah, everyone will have a chance. We’ll go quickly. These are questions that are going to be asked anyway.

Scott…at any rate, um, just so that you understand the so-called disclaimer is in the contract with Pacifica affiliates, it says if stations regularly attach disclaimers to devalue Pacifica programming, our position was uh, with the three stations who are, have actually signed this particular contract, was that essentially why would they run a Pacifica program if they were running disclaimers. Several of the disclaimers, uh, uh, had inaccurate information. You know, the inaccurate information around the union contract. We have a contract with three of our stations including …and um, the fourth, which is National Programming have union contracts. There has been a National Labor Relations Charge with um, uh, WBAI because Pacifica and I personally have um refused to negotiate with volunteers as part of the union contract. My position is that, um, volunteers and paid staff essentially have different, they have different needs and they have different responsibilities and it is inappropriate for volunteers…

(audience member: "unpaid staff"

Scott:.. to negotiate the wages and working conditions of paid staff. And I think if you look at hospitals, museums and other radio stations around the country, I think that the unions will be on the side that I’m on on that volunteers…volunteers are very valuable but they do not have a place in a union negotiating the wages and working conditions of paid staff. On the other side, Dr. Mary Frances Berry, who’s the new chair of Pacifica, uh, in dealing with the democracy issue, if those of you that have proposals to make Pacifica more democratic she’s certainly willing to listen to it, uh, and she said she would, uh if you will send her in the mail proposals that will help Pacifica in dealing with the strategic plan to meet those goals to be more democratic she’s certainly interested in hearing about that. Uh, but the point is that Pacifica is not a government. Pacifica is an institution, the managers are responsible to the Board of Governors and to me, and I am responsible to the Board of Governors. That’s how Pacifica operates.

McChesney: (off mike response) Thanks for your assistance over there, I appreciate it…other questions…yeah, go ahead

Jim Dingman: Pat, I’d like to (garbled) what Norman said at the end, to, to sort of try to heal this fratricidal civil war. My name is Jim Dingman, I served on the Program Council of WBAI for two years, and I was the elected unpaid staff representative on the local board. This fight has been going on for three years. It’s an unnecessary, fratricidal, typical left-wing "let’s kill each other" type fight. It should end today, and I ask you to pledge to this audience that you will stop, cause you have mentioned here this NLRB decision. Many of the listeners here do not know that you…that the unpaid staff won their right in the New York City National Labor Relations Board decision to be part of the unpaid staff. I went to those hearings, and thousands of listener-paid dollars have been spent in essentially attempting to destroy a labor organization at WBAI Radio. So, I ask you today to pledge to these people here, in the interests of "let’s heal this division, that you will stop your appealing of this decision to the NLRB, and just stop paying money to bust a union.

Secondly, you have made comments in the press in San Francisco, you have said that you received offers for 90 million dollars to sell the station in New York City. Those of us in New York know that the National Board, without informing the local board in New York in the past, made an offer to WNYE Radio to trade, swap, the signal without informing the people in the station. Now, all we’ve heard for the past two or three days is constant talk about media concentration and centralization and the increased values of radio signals and television signals. How can you possibly think that those of us in New York, who are hearing all this…when you make a comment that 90 million dollars has been offered to you, what are you doing? Are you doing it as a threat to intimidate those of us in New York who are involced in fighting against these anti-democratic decisions that you’re making? …

 (off mike: of course she is, of course she is)

 …I’d like to know what the truth is about this whole issue of selling the station, and why don’t you just stop this today and pledge to all of us here that we’re gonna try to have a fresh start.

 (applause)

Scott: Alright, let me address the issue of the sale of the stations…there is…there are…um…in the pacifica stations there are two uh signals that are on the commercial band. Uh, we regularly receive…I get maybe one or two calls a month, during certain periods of time at least one a week offering money for the signal in New York as well as the signal in California, in um Berkeley. Um, the signal in um …in New York, I’ve been offered, uh the organization has been offered as much as 100 million dollars. The signal in California uh, the offers have been as much as 50, 60 million dollars.

The signals are not for sale. The Board has said that over and over and over again. Um, prior to my being executive director in what Jim is talking about, NYU, the uh the…uh, the board OK’d the Executive Director at that time to look at the signal of WNYU to see if it was possible to switch it with the signal at WBAI, so that that signal could be used and the money could be pocketed to essentially support programming endowment for the rest of the organization. This is several years ago, and that fell through, and it has not been done since. The Board in its strategic planning process essentially said that we are committed to having five strong stations and any conversation that different board members raised about the sale of any Pacifica license was thoroughly squashed.

WBAI Subscriber #1: Yes, uh, I’m a long-time listener to WBAI and a supporter in monies and volunteer in answering the phones with pledge drive. I find the credibility of public broadcasting to be at issue right now, because WBAI is being forced to be hypocritical on the point of Pacifica’s gag order. There’re major issues involved with the change of WBAI including union-busting, and moving WBAI to Wall Street and these things are not discussed on air. They’re not allowed to be discussed on air because there’s a gag order.

These are not the reason for the gag order, originally so that one person wouldn’t uh back bite on another person on air…you know, internal squabbling. This is actual difference in how the radio station should run, and the people like myself who have supported BAI over the years should have a say in it, but if it doesn’t get on air the majority of people do not hear it, and will not have a say in it. And I’ve gone to a few meetings of the Board, and more than once, by different members of either the Local Board or the National Board, it has been said, "This is not a democracy."

Both Pat Scott and Nan Rubin have said this. No we were trying to discuss things. They were ruling it with an iron hand without, without allowing the listeners and people who give money to the station…

McChesney: We’ve got a lot…

Listener #1: ...My question is…does Pat believe that this will increase the popularity of, of public radio, and believe that people will believe the station when people can’t even talk about what’s happening within the station? 

(applause) 

Scott: The gag rule issue. First of all, Pacifica has had a long-standing policy um, um, pre-dating me certainly…it’s been in effect for over 20 years, which is that the internal um, shenanigans around any number of things are not to be discussed by programmers on the air. Pacifica does, however, believe that what’s going on in Pacifica uh, is and should be a subject for people that are listening to the station to deal with. We have regular reports by the manager, the calls that come in to the manager are not cut – they come in directly from people that are listening to the station and management of the station answers those questions. We sometimes set up special programs to deal with special issues of concern to people in the broadcast area. We also have local advisory boards where people come and make their concerns heard, and those concerns filter back to the governing board of the organization. 

We do not however, feel that the airwaves should be used to discuss the internecine kind of battles that go on in Pacifica. I think it’s perfectly ridiculous to expect such a thing, and that no audience, is quite frankly interested in it, except the people internally and involved in the politics of Pacifica.  

McChesney: Lynne has something… 

Lynne Chadwick: I have something I wanted to add… 

(cross talk) 

… that this kind of policy is also standard at most community radio stations, that we’re talking about here. 

Solomon: I wanted to say that I understand Lynne, that as someone who works for Pacifica, that’s a position you’re comfortable with… not everybody, even staff is. Stations have had reports to the listener, and the roof doesn’t cave in, you don’t want this stuff threading through your public affairs programming day in and day out by any means…but in a way, it’s kind of like the purloined letter, it’s right in front of us and we don’t do it. Radio is about communication, right? People listening to the station, they probably have a little bit of interest in the station. It could be a circumscribed report to listeners and include open phones and dialoguing. And sometimes people will say things that other people think are outrageous or dumb---well that’s part of the process. I think that strictly from a pragmatic standpoint, even if I didn’t care at all about any semblance of democracy, if I was a manager I’d say," Yeah, give them an hour a week or an hour a month, let’s do it," you know. And, I think, since we do care about democracy there’s a good reason to do that. 

One other quick thing. It’s not even in the context of a union battle, the context of these stations now around the country have this choice, and I would ask Pat to consider and bring up to the Board… I would request, and I know other people feel this way, that Pacifica withdraw essentially what is an ultimatum to these stations saying, you sign away some of your free speech rights on your airwaves outside of our 29 minutes. If you don’t sign it away you can’t get the Pacifica Network News. I think it’s wrong, it’s self-defeating, I think that ultimatum should be withdrawn and I would ask that Pacifica consider doing so. 

(sustained applause)

Scott: First of all, the stations have agreed with our request that they not air disclaimers right next to our programs. I think it’s a perfectly reasonable request and so do they. I mean its not an issue anymore…I don’t know why you keep dealing with it as if it is.

(off mike from audience- "next question, please)

…Also, wait just a minute, Norman also said it would be good if we had opened the phones once a week or once a month…we do that. And we absolutely do it in every signal area.

(audience erupts into many voices) 

McChesney: Let’s do the next question. We’ve got a lot of…  

Loretta Ross: Yeah, we’ve got a lot of people in line and one of the things that does distress me is process, or lack thereof, well, by those who want to protest around democracy…my name is Loretta Ross. I’ve been a community activist for the last 25 years. I am on the board of Pacifica Foundation, and proud to be so. I am an at-large member. We are at-large because we don’t come from signal areas, hopefully bringing a more objective point of view to the deliberations…the decisions that we have to make, cause we don’t have any vested interest in any one station or another, but in the politics of public radio. This is why we choose to serve. And I very consciously choose to serve at this very troublesome time. I get asked to be on a lot of Boards of Directors. Certainly walking into the pacifica Board at this time wasn’t the safest decision in the world, as you can imagine. 

I just wanted to raise a couple of issues as I see them, both as a board member, but also as a political activist who deeply cares about Pacifica. And I am really concerned that it is almost inevitable, and I don’t even want to get into a race thing, there is a tendency to disrespect the persons of people in this process that really belies the so-called democratic message that people say they are promoting. Cause if you can’t respect my personal right to speak, how can you care sbout my democratic right to participate. So shut up.. 

(applause) 

…participate in the process. First of all, I wonder often if people are as concerned about the lack of democracy as they are about the lack of getting their way. Because they do not use the democratic process, they abuse it to hammer and make very personal attacks on people that they don’t know a damn thing about. They haven’t even bothered to talk to the people that they are calling these very ugly names, and that pisses me off.  

Secondly, at Pacifica, the Pacifica Board, we have determined that every voice doesn’t deserve a mike, sorry that’s the way it is. We have to be responsive to what our listeners and our supporters want, not just what programmers want to do and say, because this is not personally-owned radio. We’ve had situations we had to deal with, somebody dies and willed their wife their radio slot, as if that is something that you can just personally put in your will and just hand on like Pacifica is your personal property just because you’ve been on the air for x number of years…sorry, that kind of business is over. And I’m one of the Board Members who is willing to take the heat and engage in any kind of respectful dialog that people want to engage in. But I’m here to tell you that personal attacks that you think you can get away with, usually because I’m black and I’m female and Pat is black and female, is going end. Cause when it starts off as a personal attack we will take it to the streets as a personal fight and it ain’t about Pacifica no more, its about people using the democratic process to practice a very unsubtle form of racism and sexism. 

(applause) 

McChesney: Let’s go to the next question, then…  

Steve Rendell: I’m glad to hear…my name is Steve Rendell. I’m from FAIR. I’m glad to hear the issue of democracy again brought up in the discussion of Pacifica. I have two brief questions. The first is: as a member of the progressive media community, I’ve heard grumblings that Pacifica is not altogether happy with one of the most important media outlets in our country today for progressives, and that is Democracy Now! I’ve heard…I’ve read an account in Salon, that Democracy Now! is being asked to rein in its politics, to tone down a little bit. I’d like to direct that question to Pat Scott.  

The next question I’d like to bring up is to Norman Solomon. I’d like him to talk about his vision, or what he would suggest for an accountable Board and for a management at Pacifica that would be accountable.

McChesney: Thank you for a fast question. If we all have fast ones we can get through this. 

Scott: First of all, there is no attempt to rein in Democracy Now! You shouldn’t believe everything that you read in the white liberal press.  

Solomon: It would be great to celebrate the turning of the millenium with Democracy Now! on their air with a much bigger budget then they have now, and I’m sure that’s something Pat would like also.  

(applause) 

In terms of structure, I don’t think there’s a silver bullet structure to solve problems. I do know that I was on the Board of KBOO Radio in Portland for five years in the 1970’s. I was elected to the Board twice, as everybody on the board was elected by members. The roof didn’t fall in. As a matter of fact, it’s a very stable station. I just went there and spoke at a benefit for KBOO in Portland, one of the strongest community stations in the country. So I think there’s a myth you can’t have some semblance of an election…I’m not saying it would solve everything, I’m not saying even that necessarily every board member needs to be elected.  

But I think along with the structural changes there needs to be a real openness of dialog and debate. And even occasionally using the airwaves to talk about this and having very open, even-handedly moderated community meetings so that something approaching dialectics can take place. I think that also would be a very important shift.  

Andrew Phillips: My name is Andrew Phillips and I’m a former program director at WBAI.  

McChesney: Yeah, please next question… 

Phillips…my name is Andrew Phillips. I’m a former program director at WBAI. I just want to say a couple of brief things…firstly, the malaise at Pacifica, I think is part of the malaise of a lot of progressive institutions. If one were to look at impact visuals for instance, there too there is a labor/management fight. If one were to look at the media network, the organization that pipelines monies to individuals who don’t have 501-c3 status, there is a labor/management fight. Of course there is one also at Pacifica. Why is this so? I suggest it has a lot to do with lack of resources.  

How can the left, how can Pacifica particularly raise more money more efficiently then the kinds of fundraising we currently undertake? High-priced premiums, much too highly priced for most people…good premiums? 

I left WBAI because I was frustrated by a lot of these issues and a lot of the political issues too that I don’t want to talk about. I started something called the virtual radio network. We distributed some programs. We did it successfully. We showed that these programs themselves could make money…the Gary Null show pulls in at least fifty thousand dollars a year in cassette sales…redistributed in formation… 

McChesney: Is there a question at the end of this? I’m just curious? 

Phillips: There is a question, sir, that goes like this, "Why is it that Pacifica cannot set up its own catalog? Why is it that Pacifica has not been able to create powerful programming which does in fact exist at the stations…and Democracy Now! does not come from Pacifica Central…it comes from WBAI. When Pacifica started the program on Iran Contra, it began six months after Iran-Contra began. WBAI started Contragate at the end of November of 1986. It took six months for Pacifica to do anything about that issue. They finally did it, but wouldn’t it have been terrific if they had done it six months earlier. 

Pacifica is consistently behind the curve. I wonder why this is? I think it’s a question that needs to be addressed by the left at large. My next question is: is this conference…are we going to hear about this conference, and about this particular panel on the Pacifica News? 

Scott: There have been a…there have been a number of people here recording um, the goings on at this total conference, so I’m sure that will be covered on Pacifica News as well as the local stations. Democracy Now! is a program that was funded by the five Pacifica stations, it is a national program not a WBAI program. Um, the malaise, uh at Pacifica, as you call it, is one of trying to find resources to do programming essentially. I said earlier that we operate on a nine million dollar budget…that is for national programming and running five major market stations. Until just recently, the programming has been such that there were very few people listening to it. We have finally begun to produce national programming like Democracy Now! and like Living Room, where you have a paid host across the week so that an audience knows where to find a program. That’s how people listen to radio. We do not continue to have the balkanized programming where we have the Israeli hour, the Palestinian hour, the African-American hour…we have stopped doing that at most Pacifica stations, though not at all of them.  

We have started looking at out most talented volunteers and programmers in the organization to try to use the KU satellite, um, to get those programs to other community radio stations, which by the way, have a more difficult time than Pacifica in terms of saying that, we don’t want you, volunteer, on the air anymore…there is amore important program, because even Democracy Now! runs at one station only one day a week, because the station finds itself unable to move volunteer programmers in those time slots, so we’re looking at serving the needs of internal people, both paid and unpaid staff, and really doing that at the sacrifice of what an audience really might want or need or can utilize.  

McChesney: Let’s get the abbreviated question version… 

Nan Rubin: This is definitely abbreviated. First, I think that Don needs to address the rest of the panel, and say that if there was truth in advertising, to say, confront Pacifica issues, you know, the rest of the panel probably could have gone somewhere else and talked about the future of public radio with Pacifica but not exclusive to Pacifica, because I think there are tremendous issues in public radio, very much outside of Pacifica that I would like to be able to discuss…but I’m not even going to ask a question about that here cause I’m afraid all these other people will get mad at me about it.  

But I also wanted to say, that in the same vein, I’d like to see why there are not similar sessions on analyzing "Z" Magazine…why are there not similar sessions analyzing The Institute for Alternative journalism…why are there not sessions on Paper Tiger Television? Free Speech TV? Well, I’m not saying that there shouldn’t be a session on Pacifica, but Pacifica is not the only alternative media in this country, and Pacifica is certainly not the only alternative media that could stand to have serious examination of the way that it makes its decisions and the way that it reaches its audiences…and I think it’s a little bit unfair for Pat to be the only one in this entire three-day conference to have to justify how her organization runs, no matter what we think of it. 

Mario Murrillo: My name is Mario Murrillo. I am the director of public affairs programming at WBAI right here in New York. I also produce the program "Our Americas" which is a co-production of BAI and NACLA that’s on about thirty stations around the country, and I also have the pleasure of owrking with Maria Martin on Latina USA. A lot of things have been said and I agree with uh.uh 

(inaudible off mike comment) 

…I’ll speak as I try to please, as I please… 

(laughter and more inaudible comments) 

I agree with Nan that this is not a Pacifica forum. I’ve been one of the outspoken persons at WBAI to hold a public forum like this with BAI and Pacifica and Union representatives…a public forum in a space like this, perhaps even larger, but it been shot down by…uh, uh.. number of times…but I’m gonna continue egging it on. I think there’s a lot of clarification that needs to be made on all sides of the argument…there are not just two sides. I think there’s a question of Hill’s vision, Lewis Hill I’m talking about, the founder of Pacifica, I think he was…I think he did have a contradictory vision…it was a liberal vision on one side, trying to keep an open space for everybody, a voice of the community, but it was also a radical position, a vision of being a force for social change. 

Now obviously when you have a radical vision like that you’re going to have to have a vanguard, you’re gonna have to have a leadership position, and somebody’s going to have to make those decisions, whether we like it or not. So, regarding David, I’m concerned, I appreciate the work you do, but I’m concerned when you say there is a politburo kind of…uh, uh, operation…at a lot of these stations you have a program director or station managers or whatever making decisions that only they could make, certainly who else is gonna make’em, certainly you have to have some democratic accountability and I think that’s the number one problem right now at Pacifica, there is no accountability, but there obviously have to be some decisions made…and, and, and there has to be a leadership that’s gonna make that decision. I’m in the same position with you distributing a national program. I know that when I pitch it to some stations, they look at it and say, "Well, we already have a Latino program, even though Our Americas is not a Latino program, it deals with other issues. 

I want you to address that because, there’s a contradiction in that. The other question about the Union, I think it’s another forum, I think, um, there are a lot of contradictions in the way it’s set up, and internally there’s a lot of things, but I still believe that that’s something that has to be dealt with internally, it’s something that should not be brought from the top down for us to live with.  

As far as the gag rule, also somebody in a position of responsibility at the station who happens to be a member of the Union, I understand why we can’t have 25 different producers going on and talking about things, many of which have a lot of the misunderstandings that are going on, but I do believe there should be a space. So certainly, we cannot have everybody coming on the air at any time saying whatever they want, and and, and then, and very often a lot of misinformation being put out…but the biggest concern that I have, and I want all of you to address this perhaps, is the point that you, Pat, said, there’s the issue of agitprop journalism.  

I want that clearly defined because this is why I’m here. I’ve worked in commercial media, I’ve worked at some of the all-news stations here, I’ve worked at national news networks, major multi-million dollar conglomerates. I’ve worked in community radio. I’ve done video. I’ve done television. The reason I’m at Pacifica, and I’ve been there for the last nine years is because I take pleasure in having a space to do alternative, so-called alternative media. And when I hear somebody saying we can’t be doing agitprop journalism…I came in, driving in today listening to the reports from Argentina about President Clinton’s visit to Argentina, and what they were saying was everything that President Clinton was saying in his press releases. Alright? 

And if I don’t have the space, like Our Americas at WBAI or Pacifica Radio to try to give an alternative view, and I’m gonna be cut down for being agitprop, them I’m gonna have to look elsewhere, and I think a lot of people here feel the same way… 

(applause and cheers) 

..just if you could define it? 

David Barsamian: about the politburo remark, actually I was thinking of NPR stations which would be good to re-include in this discussion. A certain fossilization has occurred among the gatekeepers, the program directors and the station managers, specifically, let me name a few: Max Wyseck at KCFR in Denver, Ruth Seymour at KCRW, Bill Kling at Minnesota Public Radio, uh, Jack Mitchell at Wisconsin ..can I finish please?.. 

(muttering) 

…Jack Mitchell at Wisconsin Public Radio. These people have held these positions for 10, 15, 20, 25 years. There is no young blood coming in, no opportunities for people who join these organizations to participate in the meaningful jobs. That’s what I was warning against, and what in fact has happened, and because these gatekeepers are so entrenched, so embedded in the bureaucracy, it’s reflected in the conservative programming at National Public Radio which I seek to change. That was the context of the politburo remark. 

Solomon: Very quick response to the point about agitprop journalism. By far the place I hear horrendous agitprop journalism the most frequently is on National Public Radio, and I mean that. Agitprop journalism in the sense of agitating to maintain the official reliance on official sources as representing the basic story. And because it’s so ubiquitous, we don’t call it agitprop journalism, we just call it mainstream journalism. It’s official source journalism. And if we do authentic journalism I’ll be satisfied because there’s going to be multiplicity of sources not relying on Corporate or Government America.  

McChesney: Ok, we’re going to extend this...the group that was supposed to come in here to involuntarily agree, to wait 15 minutes, and so we’re gonna go till 3:45, but I think at that time we’re up so, if people, I know you’ve got a lot to say, if you get succinct it would really be respected by the people behind you, people in the audience and up here. Thank you…Whose turn is it? Yours? OK. 

James Hibbler: Hello, my name is James Hibbler. I’m a listener, a producer at radio station BAI and um, I found it…I’ll try to be brief…but I found David Barsamian’s introduction using NPR censoring Noam Chomsky interesting, because as a producer of, and collective member of Radio Bandung, we recently were pre-empted, and we were going to have a Noam Chomsky interview live, but we were pre-empted for reasons that are somewhat unclear, as per the memo that we received.  

But it was for the stated reason…it was a conduct issue…I can speculate as to what this was, and why, as we were pre-empted for the second time this summer. um, the previous week’s show was with Robert Fish, the author of "The Assasination of New York," and he was describing the corrupt history and the nature of … the corrupt nature of the realty market in New York which also included a critique of WBAI’s’ move to 120 Wall Street.  

And it’s my belief that the reason we were pre-empted for the following week’s show is because we had this critique and analysis and we took 40 minutes of concerned listeners’ calls, because this was the first that they were hearing of this. And though the move was announced through Pacifica’s own press release, apparently analysis and critique of the move was breaking the gag rule, which seems to be enforced willy-nilly at WBAI cause I’ve heard other people report news… 

I’m sorry, I’ll be brief, so what I’d like to ask is why is there a gag rule at Pacifica? Why is the WBAI Folio now being cancelled like the other stations? Why was the public and the staff not actively involved or consulted in the move, which I think may be fiscally and politically irresponsible? Why is Pacifica union-busting, and using listeners’ dollars to do so? And, finally, I just want to say, as I approach the microphone, my boss, as I am both an unpaid staff member and a paid staff member, wrote my name down as I approached the listener’s mike and I find that highly suspect, and I wonder if I myself am gonna be expunged from...from BAI because of my belief in community radio? Thank You. 

Scott: I’ve answered a question about union-busting before this, the disagreement about whether volunteers should be in the union … I don’t think that can be called…that can certainly not be called union-busting…we have contracts with all of the other Pacifica stations and I don’t want to go through that whole thing again…Wall Street is uh… a building that during the time when Wall Street was having some serious financial problems, there was a deal cut with the landlord and the City of New York that really essentially provided the space at way below the market rate. So that, essentially, we’ll be getting almost twice the space that we currently have at WBAI and new studios for a lot less money. 

(off mike muttering) 

again, I address the gag order, that we don’t use our airwaves to talk about internal Pacifica stuff on the air at WBAI except in slotted times, and it has been talked about on the air… 

McChesney: yes, go ahead… 

Scott: …Yes, it is public information and it has been on the air. 

Don DeBarr: My name is Don Debarr and I’m a community television producer and activist in Westchester County, New York and a listener of WBAI and Pacifica. There are a number of things: one, the whole discussion about democracy makes me think that people need to look back at the original source of the term, the original societies where it was employed and realize that it was for a minority of people who were considered people at that time, and not for the bulk of human beings were not considered people. 

Secondly, I would suggest that everyone who is not familiar with what a not-for-profit corporation is, is not familiar with the form and legal expression of a not-for-profit corporation get familiar with it. In New York, look at the not-for-profit corporation law…I assume that Pacifica is domiciled in California, I would get familiar with that if you’re interested in it. A lot of this discussion is to me, as someone who is familiar with these forms…I understand why you want to have the discussion…I understand and agree with the underlying principles, but the form of the expression is not appropriate and if you end up litigating this thing ad nauseum, I don’t think it’s gonna work out favorably for the people who are interested in hearing a wide range of opinions and not being dominated by the Board. 

The idea of me walking in here today and hearing someone from management in a union dispute define the membership in a union sounded absurd to me, and I thought that was something that was settled a century ago in this country. Obviously not. 

But the thing I really wanted to say has nothing to do with this. What I think Pacifica should be doing if its going to try and promote peace and understanding and all of these things that need to be promoted in society, they might consider trying to use the programming and the air time to increase the critical skills level of the audience, whether it’s a small audience or a large one.

And if the idea is to increase the size of the audience at the expense of boosting the skills of the audience to understand what’s going on around them, I think it’s a mistake. 

In any event, I don’t think that is going to have the outcome that everyone says they want to have, which is to increase social justice and peace in the country and the world.  

McChesney: Is there a question at the end of this? 

De Barr: …The last, really, have… has anyone really been looking at what having programs with soothsayers, numerology, different things to promote metaphysical, non-critical thinking in the audience, what effect that might be having on trying to promote critical thinking in the audience? 

…I’d like to hear an answer to that, though. 

McChesney: Go ahead, next question, please… 

Dave Silver: I’m Dave Silver, charter member and supporter of BAI. Uh, I’m afraid I won’t be quite as polite as some of the others who have spoken. uh, number one: uh, you call union-busting what it is, that’s union busting. uh, the attempt is made to uh, lump, unpaid like volunteers, people to come in to man the phones during marathon time, right? 

Elombe Brath puts in a tremendous amount of work producing his program and its excellent. Where We Live, Sally O’Brien, Sape Ipicari (sp?) put an inordinate amount of time, and its an outrage to think that you want to exclude people like this from the bargaining unit. You know, the AF of L-CIO is not a revolutionary organization, yet they recognize that the American Consulting Group is a union-busting organization. Finish with that. 

Uh, we should support the union in this fight down to the wire.  

Now, the second and more important thing I would like to mention, and to me it’s the longer range question, of political struggle for the soul of this station. Let me repeat, a political struggle for the soul of this station. And let me put to rest the nice words that Pat gave us about the responsiveness of the management. There are phone calls and faxes on Valerie Van Isler’s desk from three years ago, when I raised important questions. Let me give you a little example of what I mean, right, about this political struggle. And I particularly, as someone who fought fascism, I was particularly incensed, for instance with one broadcast that equated Kristallnacht and the fall of the Berlin Wall. A fascist manifestation with something that was intended to protect socialism. 

But what has been happening in the past three years has been what I call a descent into Liberalism. Now we call it community radio, we call it alternative… 

McChesney: Can we sort of speed it up… 

Silver: …I want to know, what are we alternative to if not a predatory, racist, sexist, imperialist system that kills for profit? It’s not in the programming, because we see now as guests former CIA Directors, we see former admirals, we see all kinds of left-liberal guests in the news, behind the news, commenting on anti-communism in a leftist guise. I don’t see any room for Marxist-Lenninists, by the way, by a long shot.  

I want to urge that if they do not turn around as far as the union question is concerned, we should picket the hell out of the station. 

McChesney: Go ahead.. 

Joe Friendly: I’m Joe Friendly, a local listener… 

(calls to "speak up) 

…I’d like to know in view of the …(aside) I got it…in view of what has been written about the Pacifica Board’s activities, for example in the "Z" Magazine issue of June 11, and other writings, I wondered if there was a sense among the media and democracy congress participants, people here and in the future, more participants who are not here, should the Pacifica Board, the National Board resign because they’re just not kosher,  

(applause) 

…they’re tainted by…they are tainted by having held so many secret meetings, and otherwise indicated, despite their self-serving statements, I don’t really believe in their hearts they believe in the Lewis Hill principles. And I just wondered if there was a sense of the people here, whether the Pacifica Board should stand for a democratic election rather than being self-serving, self-appointed group?  

(applause) 

Scott: Articles in Z to the contrary, Pacifica has never had closed meetings. I’m sorry. 

(laughter from the audience) 

…Loretta is in the audience. Loretta has been around for the last coupla years. She can tell you that there have not been closed meetings. CPB…I’m Sorry!…CPB did an investigation, um, the Inspector General said that the meetings were closed. CPB itself took a look at that report, and said that the report was not to be sustained because it was inaccurate. And that is the case, there are no closed meetings at Pacifica. If you go to a Pacifica meeting you will see that the um, that the Board Meeting itself is open, the committee meetings are open, the only thing that is closed is when we’re talking about personnel and talking about confidential information relative to contracts.  

Friendly: If I can follow up on that, the reason I raised that point was that what you call "retreats" actually involved business being taken.  

Scott: The report found that the retreats were, uh, it qualified for…(cut off by tape change) 

Stefan Wray: …(first part of the question lost through tape change) …with a transmitter we could have 18 thousand micro power radio transmitters all around the United States. Um, the two questions for Norman Solomon are:

First, why has micropower radio been omitted from this panel, and the second question is, how long will we have to wait until micropower radio becomes recognized as a valuable and necessary component of community radio? 

(applause) 

Solomon: Second question first. A lot of people already recognize that it’s a valuable component of community radio, and you can’t have one panel talk about everything. But I believe it’s been on the agenda of this Congress, and I know I’ve been on several panels about the subject.  

McChesney: Alright. This gentleman… 

Erroll Maitland: I thought it was the turn of my…I know how to work this thing I think (fiddling with microphone) ...I thought it was the turn of my esteemed senior colleague over there…you know, I am first and foremost a listener to WBAI Radio, and second I am a community activist, and someone who believes that over the years, that radio and the media, as an institution is not one that has served our interest. 

Therefore, we must resort to the medium as a drum, and for me, WBAI has been a drum. It has been the drum that brings me the voices that dare to be heard anyplace else. It is the place that in ’64, ’65, and ’66 and ’67, kept me out of Viet Nam, cause it was their voice that dares to tell me that what the government was telling me was wrong.  

It was the only place back in the Iran-Contra situation that was there to tell me that what was going on was wrong. That the SCUDS missiles weren’t doing the great job as they claimed they were doing, and in fact it is the institution that tells me in the middle of the night that the cops are coming to lock the neighborhood up, so you’all better be prepared and get ready. And that may be propaganda, and it may be agitation but I do believe that it gets the information out to the people and it ought to continue to do that. 

As a steward in the Union at WBAI, and as someone who is a descendent of a slave, the labor laws in this country are derived directly from the slave code.

We as people who volunteer to serve time in BAI, and we’re not just talking about time on a casual basis…believes that it’s fair to have some kind of relationship with management spelt out in a clear fashion. Working condition, hours of work…you have a program on the air, what procedure you would go through to take that program off the air…not that change is not possible, and as someone from a disenfranchised community who is looking in this room, and looking at the panels, and looking at the constitution of this congress, knows that Black people needs to be represented and that the white power structure needs to fall.  

I am not going to hide behind my race. Yes, I’ve been beaten up because of my race, but I know the greatest traitor to the race has been what I call the "we be’s" the loyal scouts. America or Africa would not have been penetrated and would not have been lost, if it wasn’t for the Indians who were the scouts. Africa would not have been lost if it wasn’t for the Africans who took the Europeans into the interior.  

Pacifica will not be lost, if for people who are supposed to be on the inside working for the enemy, or if they’re not working for the enemy, they ought to be.  

Uh, I do believe that at this time in history, when there’s so many people decended back into virtual slavery in this society, when busting union is something that is celebrated, that it is necessary to fight on all fronts and get all the toeholds to protect the rights of people as workers, as laborers, and to respect their dignity.  

The NLRB ruling that came down around Pacifica is one that is now being used nationally to help people to organize themselves into working … in these involuntary workfare programs. So find Pacifica would be taking a backward notion to say that other volunteer organization does not go along with the concept of negotiating in a collective fashion with people who would dedicate their labor and their service, is to taking a very backward position and we ought to be leaders.  

In terms of the mission of Lew Hill, if we were to follow into the step of Pacifica today, in 1949 you could not challenge the war, the most popular war in American history, World War II, and to the…therefore, to the Executive Director of Pacifica, the Director that would sign a lease for a radio station and the General Manager would find out about that lease through a press release that comes to the news department. 

Are you willing to sit down and to negotiate a contract with all the workers. Are you willing to submit this issue to a panel of people that are respected in the community to see and to straighten out some of these lies, ambiguities and misunderstanding that we claim are coming from both sides? Thank you. 

(Applause) 

McChesney: Thank you. Let’s go on…no response?  

Scott: If you want me to answer the question, the answer to that question is "No." 

Dennis Bernstein: Bob McChesney, I’m going to ask very, four very short questions, and I’m going to hope for answers. 

McChesney: OK 

Bernstein: …not just to move on to the next person, OK? First of all, I want to apologize for calling out. I understand why Lew Hill would kill himself in the middle of these kinds of, and I’m not kidding, heated discussions, so I am sorry for calling out. And I really want to follow the process.  

Here are my very short questions that I hope to get answers to. First of all, in terms of the report to the listener on KPFA in which listener call-ins are taken, when is that on every week? What’s the regular time? What day, what time? Is it on the same time every week? Question number one. 

About the gag rule. Not too long ago, Larry Bensky, who is a favorite, and Bill Sokol, attacked Jerry Brown on the air. Will they be sanctioned for their attack on Jerry Brown? Or rewarded, in the sense …that takes me to question three… 

I understand Jerry Brown is going to be running for Mayor of Oakland. Will he be replaced by Larry Bensky, even though he violated the gag rule… 

And part four, if I play this panel on my show, will I be fired for violating the gag rule? Thank you. 

(off mike -- "off course you would!" clapping and many voices talking) 

McChesney: Alright lets…lets…you want to take the first part?  

Lynne Chadwick: Yeah, let me take the first part. I'm acting general manager at KPFA. And we have talked about having a show… we have yet to schedule that since I've been there for the last couple of months, but Dennis, I promise you we'll take that up in program council to see when we can schedule one…I think we're gonna…anyhow…the second thing is, um, uh, I guess I can't answer the questions about what National Programming is going to be…this Jerry Brown issue was just … I just found out about it less than a week ago, and so I don't know the answer on that one.  

McChesney: Maria, did you have something that you wanted to say? 

Maria Martin: Well, I wanted to save my remarks for the end, but I'll tell you (someone says something off mike) sir, excuse me… 

(off mike: someone demands answer to the question of whether Dennis can broadcast…) 

Scott: Yes, he can. 

(from off mike: "without being fired?") 

Scott: without being fired 

Chadwick: The issue is his show is only an hour long, so we may have to spread it out a little bit.  

McChesney: Maria, go ahead… 

Martin: I just want to say that in many ways I found this discussion very enlightening. In many ways I found it heartbreaking, because if Newt Gingrich was here, he would have a field day… 

(yell from the audience, "he IS here!") 

…he would have a field day. The total lack of respect with which we're treating people who have worked on both sides, who believe in what we believe… I have seen many Latino organizations die because of this kind of stuff. And now, when we need our institutions and our organizations to get messages out there all the more, I think that when we have these difficulties we need to treat each other with compassion and with respect. Be it people from Pacifica, or people from National Public Radio…we who are on the left are so quick to judge one another. In some ways, its easier for us to judge each other then to take action where the real enemy is… 

(applause)  

…and that's all that I want to say, is that we need to recognize who the real enemy is…yes our institutions need reform, but let's not destroy them in the process. 

McChesney: I hate to say it, but we are actually 15 minutes past time…we're over time now and we have been told we have to vacate for the next panel who's been waiting to use this room…