Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997
From: Mick Woolf <mwoolf@prairienet.org>
Subject: Read This ONE.

The views expressed in the following are mine as an individual in the community radio network, not as an official response at this moment as the Station Manager of WEFT (Champaign, IL.) as our Board of Directors will not convene until Monday, September 22, to discuss the Pacifica agreement issue during our regularly scheduled board meeting.

WEFT's management, Board of Directors, and Programming Committee have not broadcast any kind of formal station-wide stance with regard to the union disputes, negotiations, and conflicts that Pacifica and its associated community stations have experienced over the last couple of years between its management, staff, and volunteers.

The WEFT Programming Committee voted specifically not to enter into such a station-wide dictum for a few reasons:

1. WEFT respects the individual airshifters' right to express their own opinions, rather than foisting a statement upon them based upon a highly charged situation.

2. There are so many elements, charges, innuendoes, viewpoints and facts that have arisen due to the conflicts in the Pacifica network on all sides, many of which are still unclear.

3. The committee decided that it is more appropriate to air the varying views of the changes in the Pacifica management style, objectives, and the effects on the community and public radio network during our public affairs programs that choose to deal with such issues. Pacifica staff have also been asked to respond on some of these programs.

Last week I spoke with Gail Christian about the current Pacifica Satellite/Program agreement that was sent to WEFT which states in clause #5, line #6 that one of the ways in which Pacifica maintains a right to cancel said agreement between both parties is "if Station dilutes the good will associated with Pacifica's name." I informed her that WEFT's legal counsel had advised us not sign such an agreement due to the potential for broad sweeping dictates about what "dilutes the good will" and what WEFT can and cannot air. Gail mentioned that she had already been asked to talk with Pacifica's legal counsel about changing this clause and the answer she received was that no changes would be made. Gail and I talked informally about examples of what type of programming would and would not be acceptable to Pacifica. I told her that I would have to consult with the WEFT Board of Directors on this one and I'd get back to her ASAP.

In the mean time, I find this situation to be very disturbing in that Pacifica has no right to dictate our programming to us. Pacifica's reluctance to strike this clause, amend it, or to commit to writing clarifying guidelines and definitions of what Pacifica deems acceptable or unacceptable is, quite frankly, unacceptable. WEFT has been one of the many faithful community broadcast outposts for the Pacifica Radio Report for nearly a decade. We have also carried the "100 Days of Congress" , "Democracy Now", as well as the broadcast on the D.C. and West Coast anti-war marches during the Gulf War. And we have presented fair minded, responsible programming on the issues surrounding the current Pacifica hoopla.

The attitude reflected in the aforementioned clause is neither in the spirit of community radio nor is it in good faith. While Pacifica may be reacting to what it considers to be a need for self-protection, the clause itself and the inflexible approach to amending said clause can only serve to distance stations from Pacifica as it is insulting to receive this contract with this type of arrogant attitude. Why are we as colleagues--community radio stations and Pacifica--entering into an atmosphere of such mistrust rather than one of cooperation?

I believe that each station must figure out it's own internal affairs. While we can rely on others in the network for advice, suggestions, and perspective, it is up to each entity to come to terms with its own personnel, ideological, and policy issues. Where we can be of support to other stations, we should be. But the reality is that it is difficult enough to keep our own backyards straight and "walk the talk" by the way we treat our own staff members, both paid and unpaid. If stations are up in arms about the Pacifica personnel disputes, are those stations first taking care of their own people? By the same token, if Pacifica is so concerned about democracy, justice, and all the other platitudes of progressive thought, are their actions commensurate with the way they treat their own personnel and the stations that they are doing business with?

I find it ironic that while Pacifica would prefer to settle their differences without the involvement of the entire community radio network, that stations like WEFT who have stayed out of their problems are now being drawn in. Sure, WEFT could blow off this clause and sign knowing that we still have that 90-day out prior to each renewal cycle during the 3-year contract period. We'd save ourselves a lot of energy right now as we have a major fundraiser in a week and our fall pledge drive in two weeks. We are short-staffed, and I personally have a lot of other duties that need tending to.

However, I have chosen to contact a few other community stations to learn how they are dealing with this situation so that our WEFT Board can make a more informed decision in a few days. This is what I have learned:
1. KGNU in Boulder struck the offending clause from the contract, but Pacifica rejected their contract.

2. WORT in Madison added a brief addendum stating that they would continue to broadcast reports on the Pacifica conflicts as they occurred, and Pacifica rejected that contract as well.

3. WERU in Maine had not signed as of 9/16 due to their concerns about this clause.

4. KOOP radio is not signing the contract due to their concerns as well. 5. KZUM in Lincoln, NE signed for their own reasons.

6. KBOO in Portland, OR signed for their own reasons as well. * [Editor's note: per Per Fagereng, a member of KBOO's Board of Directors, KBOO's current contract which expires in December does not contain gag provisions. KBOO has not signed the new contract. KBOO has been running an informational disclaimer regarding the Pacifica situation since last fall.]

7. KILI of S. Dakota does not carry Pacifica.

8. WWOZ of New Orleans is a 24-hour music station and also does without Pacifica.

If there are other community radio stations who are questioning this contract and have not signed as of yet, KGNU, WORT, WERU, KOOP, and WEFT would all welcome calls or e-mail from you as to your approaches with this. If you have signed the contract and want to share your course of action, I would be interested in hearing from you as well. I would also like to add that I feel it is important to substantiate the reasons, stories, and allegations that are floating around the community radio network before making decisions on a course of action, let alone what and how information is reported and broadcast. In short, it is best to check this stuff out and confirm all this yourselves, including what I have written.

I spoke with Carol Pierson of the NFCB and she said that she had been unaware of "the clause" in the contract until our Programming Chair had mentioned it to her at the recent PD conference in Denver. I gave her the specific wording which she wrote down. She listened to my perspective on this situation, and I am expecting to hear from both her and Lynne Chadwick sometime today. I am also expecting a call from Gail Christian again who I hope to connect with soon.

My hope out of all this is the following:

1. That Pacifica's legal counsel offer specific guidelines as to what mode of reporting, editorial expression, or programming will "dilute the good will of Pacifica's name" if a station enters into the Pacifica Satellite/Program agreement, or that the clause is stricken all together. It is important for the sake of respecting the "good will" of all community stations that Pacifica find a more reasonable and cooperative approach in their business dealings with those of us who want to carry the news and their other programming, rather than one steeped in reaction so we can all get on with serving our communities through the airwaves.

2. That the NFCB act in a representative fashion for dues paying community stations in assisting us in our efforts to seek a reasonable solution to this specific contractual issue; that they clarify for us their relationship with the Pacifica Foundation and non-Pacifica stations at this point in time; and that we all get more clear on the available services they offer to community radio stations in exchange for our yearly dues. 3. That this situation affords the opportunity for NFCB stations to communicate and network together with others that we may never have met, forging relationships in a more concrete manner rather than in a nebulous, isolated theoretical concept called the community radio movement when we each of us is the only game in our respective towns.

In close, let me add that as a rep from WERU said, we are fighting for our integrity at the very least. I agree. But I added that we shouldn't have to. Let's be cool, folks, and get this one together and deal with some real problems and solutions.

Mick Woolf Airshifter at WEFT since 1982
Station Manager at WEFT since 1994