Source
Automatically imported from: http://commons.somewhere.com:80/rre/1995/Radio.Resistor.s.Bulleti.html
Content
| | | | --- | --- | | Red Rock Eater Digest | Most Recent Article: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 |
Radio Resistor's Bulletin #11
```
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 07:58:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Frank Haulgren - R.R. Bulletin"
Radio Resistor's Bulletin Frank Haulgren, Editor PO Box 3038, Bellingham, WA, 98227-3038 E-mail haulgren@well.com Letters, comments and articles are encouraged.
Radio Resistor's Bulletin #11 Summer, 1995 Copyright 1995
---
"Operating an illegal radio station isn't easy and poses a considerable risk, but there comes a point when many realize that the night is long, life is short, and all we have depends on risk." Doug Nufer
---
C O N T E N T S #11
DRIVE BY RADIO. By Kevin Berger "... talk radio hsa flourished not because it unites people in a community of ideas, but because it allows people - both hosts and listeners - to indulge their private fantasies."
Back Talk: Letters to the Bulletin
Publication Notes: SLINGSHOT, Summer 1995.
FAR RIGHT RADIO REVIEW CARRIES ON. By James Latham and Brad Heavner Radio For Peace Intenational's program providing ongoing investigation and monitoring of far right radio on the shortwave.
COMMUNITY RADIO: On a different spectrum. By Brian Anastasi Thoughts on providing community access to the under used AM spectrum.
Seattle: MICRO RADIO vs THE LAW: Take Back the Air By Doug Nufer "...the beauty of micro radio is its absolute difiance of authority."
ADAMANT EVE: The story of a women's radio collective. By Jana S Razga, CJSR, Edmonton, Alberta "One of our primary goals... was to offer the technical train- ing... necessary to empower women to initiate and follow through on their own projects."
NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD: Defending the rights of micro broadcasters. By Peter Franck, National Lawyers Guild A sketch of the Guild's Committee on Democratic Communica- tions' involvement in the micro movement.
PACIFICA AT THE CROSSROADS: Dissent grows at foundation's stations. By Herman Padilla, Pacifica Accountability Committee Herman runs down the current situation at Pacifica's sta- tions as the network struggles through its ongoing identity crisis.
RADIO BRIEFS: Budapest Syracuse, New York Eastern Canada MPR
INFOBOX *
RADIO RESISTOR'S BULLETIN #11, S U M M E R 1995 Frank Haulgren, Editor copyright 1995 Copy and redistribute freely. Please give credit to the Bulletin and authors when excerpting.
---
Drive-by Radio. Taking your best shot?
By Kevin Berger
Rush Limbaugh was perspiring badly. Face-to-face with an angry black woman in a TV studio audience, who was raging that his views were responsible for violence toward women, the King of Talk Radio was rendered speechless. His famous ego had crumbled under the confrontation. Clearly, he was in pain. That, anyway, is the image that lingers from the recent PBS documentary on Limbaugh. It is also the image that speaks a thousand words about the duplicity of talk radio. Some media watchers see talk radio's rise in popularity as the desire of an alienated populace to come together. They see talk radio as an aural town hall meeting where the lively exchange of ideas sows a fruitful community life. Nothing could be further from the truth. While the desire for social communion is certainly real, talk radio only exploits, and in fact exacerbates, alienation. In plain physical terms, talk radio means an isolated person in a studio talking at an isolated person in an automobile. Radio audiences are the largest during rush hours, when up to 60 per- cent of commuters are whiling away traffic by listening to their favorite station. In cities across the country, up to 90 percent of commuters drive alone. So talk radio has flourished not because it unites people in a community of ideas, but because it allows people - both hosts and listeners - to indulge their private fantasies. Howard Stern, for instance, can boast that he hopes Cindy Crawford "gets into a disfiguring car accident and Richard Gere has to live out his years staring at a legless, toothless, tit- less Cindy Crawford"- because, like a king in his fortress, he can speak without fear of instant reprisal. Likewise, one need not quote sociologists and traffic-safety experts to know that people become rude and self-centered while sitting inside a two-ton steel device that quickly reaches a ge- taway speed. The invective that is now the vernacular of talk ra- dio plays so well in the car because, being alone, commuters can revel in their own inviolability. Defenders of Limbaugh and Stern love to taunt liberals who complain about the hosts' reactionary rhetoric. If you want to challenge their popularity, they say, put your own hosts on the air to talk up progressive issues. But of course it's not that simple. Progressive issues of community and ecology, issues that tran- scend self-interest, simply do not lend themselves to talk ra- dio. Feeling connected with others, and with the environment, is the antithesis of sitting alone in a car on a congested freeway. Limbaugh's and Stern's revenge fantasies - aimed at liberals and celebrities - are what keep the commuters satisfied. The late novelist and essayist Walker Percy wrote that language "is the stuff of which our knowledge and awareness of the world are made." Through our use of language, Percy main- tained, we become "co-conceivers and co-celebrants" of the world. Language is what delivers us from alienation. Yet language uttered without regard for listeners, without responsibility - as it is uttered in isolated radio studios - de- grades its celebrative powers and leaves us, as Percy wrote, "much nearer total despair." True, "total despair" may sound a little melodramatic. But just wait. The General Accounting Office predicts that by 2005 traffic congestion will have increased 452 percent. Let's see if, by then, total despair isn't the precise term for the sound of talk radio.
Kevin Berger is a San Francisco Bay Area journalist who fre- quently writes about radio. E-mail 73054.320@compuserve.com
--------------------------------- ---------------------
Back Talk: LETTERS TO THE BULLETIN PO BOX 3038 BELLINGHAM WA 98227-3038 E-mail haulgren@well.com
Thanx a lot for sending R.R.B. Really well written and informa- tive. I'm interested in any non-main stream use of any media - freedom of expression most important. The local college radio used to have a real good mix of programming, but they changed to a constant diet of college/alternative music. One of the big ra- dio stations in Grand Rapids had good music but switched to 'Classic Rock'.... Your 'zine says "copy and redistribute," so I'll put some of it in "Food for Thought" when it comes out... Will also see to it that as many as possible see Radio Resistor's Bulletin. Thanx, Ed Singer Holland, Michigan
*
Many thanks for your note and the accompanying issue of Radio Resistor's Bulletin No. 10. It is very encouraging to discover that we (the community producers here in London Ontario, Canada) are not alone in our concern for the future of local, grass roots, alternative broadcasting. I'm also excited by the formation of the Friends of Hamilton Went- worth Community Radio. What a study in contrasts, though! While Victoria Fenner, the general manager at CFMU-FM Hamilton, appears to support the efforts of volunteers to forge an identity for their station, our GM (Mario Circelli) always has been paranoid about too many volunteers congregating in order to discuss plans for Radio Western (94.7 FM). You may be interested to know that our group, Volunteer Advo- cates for Campus and Community Radio (VACCR), has compiled com- plete documentation of our experiences (letters, commentary, a chronology etc.) in the form of a 150 page "Report on Radio Western" [now available in hypertext on The World Wide Web. The URL is http://www.cfn.cs.dal.ca/ ~ad562/vaccr/rorw/toc.html]. This massive document was submitted to the CRTC in August 1993 as part of a bid to intervene in the license renewal process for CHRW-FM. Although the CRTC felt that most of our concerns lay outside its purview (citing, erroneously, a sharp division between programming and internal management decisions), its chair, Keith Spicer, was not amused when he learned first hand about how at least 25 of CHRW's senior volunteers, each averaging ten years experience in radio, had been banned from the station for life, both as broadcasters and as guests. Many of the remaining volunteers know about the abuses of power at the sta- tion (and don't care much for the current "management team"); however, out of fear of losing their shows, they won't speak out and continue to brainwash themselves into believing that apathy and the status quo are preferable to critique and sincerity. Well, as you can see, there is much to talk about; so, I do hope you will keep in touch. I think your publication is first class, essential reading and I will spread the word to my fellow produc- ers who would be very interested in contributing news and arti- cles for upcoming editions of the Bulletin. Keep up the great work! Brian Hannigan Community Producer London, Ontario CANADA E-Mail: hannigan@julian.uwo.ca
Don't know if you remember me or not, it was long ago that I first wrote you, but, in a way that's not too important. I wanted to write to praise you on a what a great job you're doing. I have been out of contact w/my e-mail for a while and plugged it back up to find RRB10 there, waiting for me. It was a great read. Very inspirational to hear what's going on out there in the world of Free Radio. I just wanted to say thanks for compiling such an interesting array of commentary. Thanks - Keep it up Darren Darren=Orr%ISDCCC%KOCE@banyan.cccd.edu
---
Publication Notes: By Frank Haulgren
SLINGSHOT. #53, Summer 1995 c/o Long Haul, 3124 Shattuck Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 Phone (510)540-0751
The Summer issue of Slingshot,, an independent radical paper out of Berkeley publishing since 1988, contains two detailed articles about Free Radio Berkeley - the leader of America's micro- broadcasting movement. The first piece, "Exploding Onto the Airwaves", covers the now much-told story of FRB, as well as pok- ing into the nature of keeping a non-heirarchical radio station on the air. Most interesting is a section discussing "the pro- cess": "... Some chafed strongly at the idea of a structure, feeling that it hampers spontaneity and reproduces the very authority the radio strives to resist. It creates a situation, however, in which others feel oppressed by the 'tyranny of structureless- ness.' The failure of any group to outline common goals and norms of conduct leads to a de facto hierarchy headed by those accustomed to wielding power." The second FRB article, "The Legal Victory of FRB", deals with the station's battle with the FCC. P.B. Floyd does an excellent and detailed job of analyzing federal judge Claudia Wilkin's de- cision to refuse the FCC's request for an injunction against Stephen Dunifer and the station. Floyd notes that while the ar- gument Dunifer's National Lawyers Guild defense has chosen relies heavily on constitutional issues surrounding free speech, this is an issue that the feds did not choose to argue during the initial hearing -- but may yet. The article also points out that Dunifer's lawyers have not chosen to attack the FCC's authority to regulate micro-pirate broadcasting but rather, that the FCC ban against licensing and regulating stations smaller than 100 watts effectively eliminates all but the wealthy and corporate entities from use of a public resource, a resource that in increasingly post-literate times is crucial to voices espousing minority viewpoints. While the FCC has pled "scarcity" of spectrum in every case of this kind since the 1930's, Dunifer argues that new technologies have opened the door to an entirely new way of using the spectrum in a far more efficient manner. He points to the equipment he has developed and is offering for sale as well as 1993 Canadian legislation which legalized micro broadcasting in urban areas as long as broadcasters submit a brief application and affirm that their hardware meets certain technical standards. P.B. Floyd cautions, however, that claims of victory could be premature and runs through several scenarios that could play out leaving either the FCC or FRB victor. In his concluding para- graphs Floyd writes: "If the FCC loses and the complete prohibi- tion on micro radio licensing is found unconstitutional, the FCC would presumably have to license... stations. They might do this like in Canada with a simple 2 page form and minimal or no fees. However, they might agree to license micro radio stations but make the standards and fees so difficult as to effectively prohi- bit real 'grassroots' community access to the medium." While a number of the articles I've read about FRB and its battle with the FCC increasingly cover some pretty well-worn ma- terial, these two pieces in the Summer '95 issue of Slingshot effectively shed new light on the evolution of FRB and the U.S. micro-broadcasting movement. They also raise some questions worth pondering about what the outcome of this case may eventu- ally mean for the alternative voices and viewpoints that populate grassroot's radio.
---
Far Right Radio Review Carries On.
By James Latham and Brad Heavner Radio For Peace International
(Note: In October of 1994 the producers of Radio for Peace International's Far Right Radio Review (FRRR) announced that they would continue to produce the FRRR. This article was compiled from 3 reports that appeared in RFPI's newsletter, Vista. Ed.)
There is still a need for this program. Programs from organi- zations like the National Alliance, the White Aryan Resistance, the Liberty Lobby, and other outgrowths of the John Birch Society are only getting stronger. Some spout their racism openly and directly, proudly labeling themselves as Nazis. Others are more subtle in trying to win people over to their reactionary cause. The Christian Identity Church is another particular matter of concern. The more extreme factions of this movement -- which support their "pastors" on shortwave -- hold dangerous beliefs. They tell us that white Aryans are the true Israelites, Jews are the descendants of Satan and should be exterminated, and that it is their followers' God-given duty to rid America of all foreign elements. Distorted quotes from the Bible are used to support these claims. In an atmosphere of xenophobia and militancy, Identity Christianity is the fastest-growing religion in the US today. There are three shortwave stations largely dedicated to such programming -- WRNO, WWCR and WINB -- with the schedules of oth- ers littered with small handfuls. The amount of repetition alone will convince some listeners who might otherwise have more sense. And the easy answers to complex problems are appealing to many. One program the FRRR had been monitoring, American Town Forum, recently vanished without warning. The story was that its host had been imprisoned and was awaiting trial on 32 counts of rack- eteering and fraud, evidently not related to his show. Another producer, Linda Thompson, used her broadcast to organ- ize an armed march on Washington, DC. In one recent edition of the program, broadcast on WWCR, she described how you could knock down government 'Black Helicopters" flying overhead... (Heard recently on another WWCR program host Kurt Saxon) enthusiastically went into step-by-step details on how to build incendiary bombs from materials (available at) local stores. These voices are clearly entering people's minds and influenc- ing them. As one example, a New Zealand man who recently shot 13 people in one spree had reportedly been inspired by a program originating in Arkansas. Why Shortwave? Actually, it's not just on shortwave. Many far-right programs are simulcast on shortwave/AM/FM stations. But, here is a hypothetical case that might explain why shortwave is used. Let's say you have the organization "Square Earth So- ciety" with 10,000 members scattered across the US. You're based in Salem, Oregon. Until now, you've only been able to keep in touch with members with a monthly newsletter, but you need weekly contact. You can buy airtime on the local AM or FM stations in major cities around the US, but that's costly, and still leaves a lot of your people out. Finally, you could buy airtime on a shortwave station (about the same price as a local station) and convince your members to buy (or you sell to them) shortwave re- ceivers. Now you can keep in touch with the "Square Earthers" weekly or even daily, plus attract new members from the vast corners of this square world. Some responsibility must go to the station owners for pro- moting the S.W. medium for use by the far-right/hate programmers. If you ever have a chance to talk to a radio station owner (AM/FM/SW), you will generally find he/she is committed to his/her station's format He/she likes it. Plus, he/she knows the format will pay off in dollars. It takes big bucks to start, run and maintain a shortwave station ($1-5 million). Mainstream commercial advertisers never really got the hang of selling their products over this medium. This forced the owners to sell large airtime blocks. A sign of success by the far-right on using shortwave is the fact that often you hear of a new far-right/hate program start up with a half hour a week and quickly jump (some- times within a few months) to several airings a week, and within a year, they are commenting on either buying or building a shortwave facility. While these kinds of broadcasts are targeted to the North American audience,... shortwave stations (unlike AM or FM) are quite often heard worldwide. From listening to the number of phone call-ins they get, one would guess that they have a good many US listeners, particularly the Survivalists and Conspiracy Theorists. Listenership outside of the United States is anyone's guess, but please consider that the combined power of these sta- tions broadcasting far-right programming is much stronger than most of Latin American government stations, and probably rivals that of the shortwave broadcasting facilities of some European countries. Recently, a volunteer at RFPI visited one of the taverns in downtown San Jose, Costa Rica where he was handed a pamphlet on which was printed a Conspiracy Theorists view of a secret government and the times and frequency to tune in to the far-right programs broadcast on shortwave. On one occasion the FRRR monitored a far-right preacher claiming to have sold 30,000 shortwave receivers to his followers. Since first of the year the Far Right Radio Review has begun to expand its focus. It has gone from concentrating solely on investigating the racist/hate programming to be on shortwave to a broader analysis of media, political and cultural issues. (Given) the present condition of mass communications, it is difficult for progressive-minded activists to gain publicity through mainstream media outlets and use it as a means for organ- izing. The wildest stunts can be staged without getting that treasured front-page picture. The reason for this is obvious. Greedy corporations with short term interests own these media outlets. The don't want a majority of all people to come to an accurate understanding of just how serious our environmental crisis is, exactly how we came to this stage of post-industrial decay, and what is the true effect of the foreign policies of the richest nations. They are ultra-conservative because they are wealthy. They are wealthy because they are ultra-conservative. The system feeds upon itself. We are not wealthy. How do we beat that? Consider the success of Pat Robertson's Christian Coalition in the most recent national elections in the US. According to their own statistics, they had backed 44 out of 73 newly-elected members of the House of Representatives. How did a reactionary, fringe organization come to have such a great effect on the US political landscape? Surely there aren't that many people look- ing to support a televangelist known for intolerance. The argu- ment that so many millions of Americans do agree with Robertson's positions simply does not stand. They have been told to support these for easy answers to complex problems, and we can convince them of a more sensible position just the same. For may years, the Religious Right has been working hard to gain widespread support without the help of corporate money and mainstream media. They have organized direct mailing campaigns, hosted conferences, and constructed telephone trees without pause. Their efforts have been directed toward a wide cross- section of people, many of whom would not normally support an agenda of prayer in schools and anti-gay initiatives. One FRRR listener sent the producers some materials distributed by the John Birch society which he had picked up at the Dallas Family Pet Show. Another passed on a church-sponsored flyer, which had been inserted in his local newspaper, wildly attacking the federal government . The Religious Right has used these outreach methods effectively and extensively enough to come to where they are now. Through decades of work, they are growing toward a ma- jority of seats in the national legislature. We are not suggesting that progressives adapt all the tech- niques of Pat Robertson's machine, of course. Campaigns of slander are no way to maintain one's moral authority. Distribut- ing deceptive and often fraudulent voters guides is just plain wrong. People for the American Way reports that the Christian Coalition is under investigation by the Federal Election commis- sion for its activities in the 1992 election after complaints in 35 states. Hopefully these tactics will eventually backfire. (James Latham created the FRRR after he) heard a caller on one show ask, "We have a lot of Martians down here. Can you advise us about a good weapon to get rid of them?" 'Martians', in the vernacular of the far-right shortwave vernacular refers to people of color. The host of the show complied. Certainly Radio For Peace International doesn't have the transmitting power or finances of the combined power of these private shortwave stations. However, we must counter this grow- ing racist programming on the shortwave medium and bring it to the attention of the public. (And) in terms of the station owners, they must ask them- selves, "Does it really serve the 'public good' to broadcast techniques on how to kill people and how to get away with it?"
This article is compiled from material that previously ap- peared in Vista, the newsletter of Radio For Peace International
---
Community Radio: on a different spectrum.
By Brian Anastasi
I have always had a great affinity for radio, especially AM ra- dio. But during the past three decades, I have watched FM come in and all but destroy AM radio, relegating AM to something all but forgotten by a good portion of the population. (Even though everybody seems to know who Rush Limbaugh is, I doubt that large numbers of people have actually been able to find him precisely because he is on AM radio.) And I have watched the medium of ra- dio change from something which truly served the public with in- formation they needed to know, to something which was just an ex- cuse to sell something. For the last three years, I did a political talk show on the AM station here in Amherst, Massachusetts (WITT, 1430). I did this show precisely because I wanted to give something back to the medium which had given me enjoyment all the years while I was growing up. The show was called "Valley Voices", and during my four hours every Sunday, I would invite local political activists to come into the studio, and give them an hour of virtually unin- terrupted airtime to talk about their work. In other words, I was giving the power of the media back to the average person. I feel that all commercial broadcast radio and television will probably be obsolete by the year 2000. Precisely because people will have a vast number of ways to spend their free time, both commercial radio and commercial television will have a harder time surviving. I feel the cable networks which aim their pro- gramming at a very narrow, distinct audience (such as the Home & Garden Network and the Food Network) will be better suited to surviving into the next century because they will fill a specific need or want. When all of this shakedown is finished, AM radio stations, especially the few remaining standalones that are left, will ei- ther be turned off or sold for bargain basement prices by their owners. This, I think, will be the perfect opportunity for aver- age people to finally gain access to mass media. And AM radio will be the perfect medium for the average person precisely be- cause they don't have the sound quality of FM, and therefore will not be under pressure to program to a mass audience as FM does. So, this is my vision: Maybe one AM station in each major market, with a format based on the community access cable televi- sion model. Everybody in the community would have to go through a training process, and learn basic engineering techniques, FCC rules and regs, how to run the equipment, etc. Once they are "certified", these people would be allowed access to the airwaves for at least one hour a month, to do with as they pleased within FCC guidelines. All they would have to do is call up and schedule a time. Along with this open scheduling, I also envi- sion the radio station as a place where "certified" people could also schedule time in another studio to prerecord interviews and experiment in producing other alternative types of programming. Along with the community's direct access to the airwaves and studio equipment, I would also incorporate cable access's policy of airing programs produced elsewhere if requested by someone who has been certified. This would include programs that might be objectionable to a certain segment of the community, such as the Bo Gritz or Howard Stern shows. But the station I envision truly would have an open exchange of ideas and opinions. So, that's my idea. I just don't know where to proceed with it from here. I suspect that a change in FCC laws, which might require some sort of class-action law suit, is what may need to happen. But whatever the case, I need lots of people who might share my vision to contact me so that together we can figure out what needs to be done and what to do next.
Internet: brian.anastasi@the-spa.com Postal Service: 37 Greenwich Rd. Amherst, MA 01002-3220
---
Seattle: Micro Radio vs the Law: Take Back the Air!
By Doug Nufer Used with the author's permission.
Thirty years after my life with radio began, I would drive through the night to the racetracks of California. Down the coast to Golden Gate or across the desert to Santa Anita, the drive came to matter more than the arrival and there seemed to be no point in giving up as long as the possibility existed that something new would happen, something completely unexpected. As the glamour of gambling wore thin and playing the horses became more tedious than working in the boneyard of contemporary fic- tion, all need and hope to beat the odds focused not on the next race or the next book but on the next moment of what would come out of the air on the radio. Past midnight, music changes and talk deviates from norms established in accordance with the work day. Although off-hours' programming also accommodates a kind of predictability, the chance that some maniac will seize the moment seems more immedi- ate when you're alone in the dark at 80 miles an hour. I was about to turn off the Lee Peete Show from Las Vegas, a sports roundtable for hardcore bettors sponsored by "our fine hotels," when a bookie named Donnie stopped giving point-spreads and started to give movie reviews. "Hey, I went to the movies last night," he said, and when nobody believed him, i.e., when nobody believed that anyone could do anything but bet on sports events, Donnie spent the next twenty minutes defending American Cinema with absurd and accurate plot summaries of Eddie Murphy movies, while other bookies on the show challenged the likelihood of all that occurred. It couldn't last and maybe it never happened again. Or maybe it wasn't unusual enough, so I kept at the buttons, pushing off songs from a childhood we were all supposed to have had. I only wanted to hear what I had never heard before, and when "our fine hotels" wouldn't give it to me and when even college stations turned pro, it was time to look elsewhere, to quit driving back from the track in a romantic haze that confused destiny with luck. Years passed and syndicated network shows forced most anything quirky off of the air; I stuck with radio. Tapes were for den- tists, records were for garage sales, and CDs were the rich stealing from the poor, but with radio, even with all the crap that filled the air, you never knew what would come next. A few months ago in Seattle, some people got tired of waiting for that moment and decided to make it happen themselves. They set up a micro watt transmitter on Capitol Hill and blasted their songs into the night. It didn't last, but some others have started a station of their own. And they're part of an organiza- tion which has been set up to help more people get on the air. Operating an illegal radio station isn't easy and poses a consid- erable risk, but there comes a point when many realize that the night is long, life is short, and all we have depends on risk. With a few hundred bucks and some nerve, you can do anything. Some people caution against going on the air without having an agenda of ideas to communicate, or without having an organization of mini-specialists whose combined talents and skills can produce quality programming, but the beauty of micro radio is its abso- lute defiance of authority. Not only can you do anything, any- thing you do is bound to be better than 90% of what's on the air now. The most ambitious micro station would have a hard time put- ting together a program such as the KCMU (University of Washington's "alternative music station") news hour, which has locally produced stories as well as stuff from its national affi- liate (Pacifica) -- how could an illegal broadcaster gain regular and timely access to new sources? But more fundamental than news access is the question of listener access to you. Anyone who goes on the air has to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of exposure and of secrecy. "We've always been totally upfront about broadcasting," says Free Radio Berkeley's Stephen Dunifer. "This is a full-bore cam- paign to liberate the airwaves." "We want to be more clandestine, to have a lower profile," says D of Seattle. "Radio is a disembodied medium. I like the notion of being inconspicuous," as a voice in the air. D and his friend J represent another part of micro broadcast- ing. Removed from the arena of the federal court system, they began transmitting in Seattle in early May (1995). They invite people to contribute time, tapes, and their support to their sta- tion, but they're more interested in helping others set up their own stations in neighborhoods all over the city. Rather than have one station or one voice, J would like to have many voices expressing themselves, as on the Internet. This desire to cooperate rather than compete is widespread in the micro world. To work for free, to do something for the love of doing it rather than for money is ultimately unacceptable to the American commer- cial system. ... What you're supposed to do is buy all you can and sell all you must while all you hear, watch and read is pro- vided by others. Pay taxes and die, but don't, under any cir- cumstances, put any of this information to use. Where, then, can you find J and D? "In our neighborhood," says D. "Look between the lines," says J. Stay tuned.
A slightly different version of this article appeared in the May 24, 1995 issue of The Stranger, a Seattle weekly.
---
ADAMANT EVE The story of a women's radio collective.
By Jana S. Razga CJSR, Edmonton, Alberta
I am involved with a women's radio collective in Edmonton, Alber- ta, Canada, at the University of Alberta's campus and community radio station, CJSR. I have been working on the program as a volunteer for almost two years now and our goals and direction have changed quite a bit in that time. Also, because the radio station is volunteer-run and we tend to see a high turnover rate of contributors, the voices of women who have taken part have changed over the years.
When I first joined the women's program, which is called "Adamant Eve", it had quite a mainstream-feminist slant to it, focusing on intellectual discussion. Because of my commitment to the program and it's goal of feminism and putting positive images of women onto the airwaves, I was eventually asked by the news director to fill the position of producer of the program. I was not exactly comfortable with taking on that role myself, so I asked another woman to join me and we co-produced.
As co-producers we were 'responsible' for the programming, but it often felt like the show 'belonged' to us and that contri- butors just helped us to fill time. We tried to get around this by suggesting a 'rotating producer' where a contributor could take on the role of producer if there was a particular show theme that she was inter-ested in presenting, etc. No one ever took the bait.
At around the same time, I became much more interested in making the program into something more radical than it had been - or at least adding a radical element. I wanted to get away from the mainstream-feminist discourse and start talking about things like anarcha-feminism. I began to do a regular segment on Adamant Eve, called Vaginal Discharge (I wanted the title to be as radical as possible, so to alert the listeners that this seg- ment was equally radical, something different from the rest of our programming). I used this segment as an expression of my own views on hierarchy in society, hierarchy in the feminist move- ment, sexism in the anarchist movement -- views that my co- producer and other contributors did not necessarily agree with.
I think it was a good move to break up the monolithic view of feminism that our program had been focusing on previously, however, it came to this: I eventually became incapable of deal- ing with the internal conflict of espousing anarchism on the air, while holding the position of producer in a hierarchical struc- ture behind the scenes. I talked to my co-producer often about Adamant Eve becoming a radio collective and eliminating the need for producers, overseers, etc. She disagreed with me, saying it would never work because contributors to the program were so dependent on the producers that they would be unable to take the initiative and responsibility to work collectively. What did I do? I left the program intending only to take a break, and return as a contributor, not a producer.
Four months later I returned to Adamant Eve . The woman I had been co-producing with had continued to produce the program on her own, and by now was so burned-out that she was not even contributing to the program any longer, her time taken up solely on running the program. It was no longer fun for her (which is essential in volunteer work, to keep one interested), she was no longer excited about radio and so, had a very difficult time in- spiring contributors and welcoming new volunteers. I recall a story meeting I attended where a woman interested in joining the program must have been discouraged by the producer's lack of enthusiasm (she bearly even acknowledged this prospective new volunteer's presence!) because we never heard from her again.
It was then that I again suggested we try to become a women's radio collective. This time, instead of leaving such a discussion for the privy of "one-producer-to-another", I sug- gested it to everyone at a story meeting. The other contributors (almost an entirely new crew, remember the high turn-over I men- tioned earlier) were intrigued by my idea. I argued that working collectively would spread out the responsibilities (no one per- son takes the fall if something goes wrong, no one person is susceptible to the kind of burn-out a volunteer producer is al- most inevitably going to encounter) and power in decision- making. This would ensure that each contributor could feel that the program was equally her own, that each has an equal input into shaping the program, and hence an equal stake in the out- come and quality of the programming. We put it to a vote, our first 'collective' action, and the idea to become a women's radio collective was unanimously accepted by all present.
The collective has been in existence now for about 8 months. It has involved a lot of work in terms of reorganizing, while at the same time, maintaining a weekly radio program of quality. The sound of the program has changed radically since one year ago; for example, a lot of times our music features are having to do with 'riot grrrl' -type rock bands, as is the preference of col- lective members, and we try to offer practical suggestions for alternatives to corporate, pharmaceutical and medical solutions to women's health issues (we have a health feature called "The Conscious Cunt" which has dealt with herbal contra-ceptives and herbal abortion, as well as preventative measures towards main- taining personal health).
More importantly, our goal has been reshaped as well. Since we felt that the kind of programming we did in the past was not always accessible to listeners off campus in terms of being high- ly intellectualized "insider"-type discussions of feminist is- sues, we have decided to make our show more accessible for women in the com-munity by focusing on voices of women within the com- munity. We have begun to establish a network with women's groups in Edmonton, so that Adamant Eve can be a vehicle of information on local women and activities. We have also switched to a lot more discussion-type programming (ie.interviews, group and panel discussions) rather than the book-review/film-review-type pro- gramming that we used to do -- we still include those types of things, but they are not the main focus any longer.
One of our primary goals in terms of creating an atmosphere of equality within the collective was to offer the technical training which I see as necessary to empower women to initiate and follow through on their own projects. This, I think, is also necessary in order to get rid of the notion of expertise, which is ultimately elitism (for example, if I am the only one who knows how to work the sound board, I hold a certain amount of power over the other women, since they are forced to rely on my knowledge -- training people makes that knowledge universal and accessible).
As well, we have stopped defining the program as a feminist program. Although we continue to be a pro-feminist group, we felt that a) the meaning of that word has become so ambiguous, b) such a narrow definition alienates women who shy away from labeling themselves, and c) our focus is women's voices and experiences, where as feminists can be women and men. This is part of our mission to be more inclusive of all women in our community.
When the collective began, our membership shifted again so that I was one of the only 'veterans' from before. I was charged with new ideas and suggestions and very vocal. Often new volunteers came to me for advice on what to do, topics, etc. Be- cause I am still so concerned about taking on a leadership role (rather, avoiding such a role), I suggested that we implement an "idea jar" (an idea suggested to me by my partner after many discussions about my concerns regarding leadership). The Adamant Eve Women's Radio Collective Idea Jar is a place where people who have a lot of ideas for radio projects and little time to ini- tiate them, could write down their ideas and put them in the jar. On the other hand, those having trouble coming up with ideas for radio projects, but looking for a way to participate, could go to the jar to check out what's in there and take from it any ideas which they are interested in following up. The idea jar has also become a way for others to participate in our show, since the jar is in a visible place at the radio station and all are welcomed to contribute ideas (even men!); the members of the collective taking from it what they want.
Of course, not everything has always run completely smooth- ly. There have been a lot of wrinkles to work out, but what pleased me most was that this project was finally past the draw- ing room and into construction. One of the problems that we en- countered was that women didn't always know what it meant to take part in a collective, and sometimes looked to me as an authority. When they asked me "What do you think if I ....", I would open it up to the whole group, "what does everyone think?" This situation changed as we settled in to working together and sharing with each other on a level field.
Another problem was that the administrative staff at the ra- dio station didn't always know what it meant for us to be a col- lective, so for example, when a decision was "passed down" from the program manager, she would bring it to me to tell to the oth- er women (I think it may have also been because I used to be the producer and the administrative staff were not completely fami- liar with the newer members of the collective). It is difficult to work collectively within a structure which is not necessarily collective (sometimes I felt that everyone else was watching us, skeptically). On the other hand, our program does enjoy a certain amount of favor among the staff at the station because there is a strong feminist thread in the administration (the program manager, news director, and administrator are all women).
Over the past eight months, we have accomplished a lot for ourselves as a collective and for the community affected by our programming. Our biggest project was dealing with the controver- sial issue of our use of the word 'cunt' in the title of our al- ternative women's health segment, "The Conscious Cunt". Original- ly, it was viewed by the program manager as obscene language and would fall under Part I, Section 3(c) of the Canadian "Regula- tions Respecting Radio Broadcasting", which reads: "a licensee shall not broadcast any obscene or profane language." Our use of the word, however, focuses on the original meaning of 'cunt', which finds its roots in the Latin word 'cunnus', referring to both female genitalia and women with connotations of respect, wisdom, and knowledge. It was our goal to educate our listeners, women especially, in order to bring to light the empowering ori- gins of a word which has been so subverted that today, in its slang usage, it is considered one of the (or even the) most harmful profanities directed towards women. This, as an effort to take away the negative power of those who use the word 'cunt' as a derogatory reference to women and give power back to women themselves, parallels one of the goals of the women's health seg- ment; to give power over their health and their bodies back to women. The distortion of the word 'cunt' is linked to the medieval witch hunts and a long history of women's knowledge and power being perverted by patriarchal, medical and religious au- thorities.
The collective decided to devote one entire show to discus- sions on the 'cunt controversy', the limits of radio broadcast- ing, and the etymology of the word itself, and to use this show as a catalyst for inviting listener feedback. We prepared a one hour show which included a round table discussion with the col- lective, the program manager and the president of the station's board of directors, as well as interviews with women who had brought a play about women's power called "The Happy Cunt" to Ed- monton in the summer of 1994. In addition to these and etymologi- cal descriptions of 'cunt', we included comments from the public at large which we had gathered in shopping malls and on the university campus. During the show, we encouraged listeners to get involved in the discussion and call in to comment. We also took an informal poll, asking listeners if they felt we should continue our use of the word on the radio. We believed that listener's opinions were the most important in regards to our programming, and that if the majority of them supported us, we would have to continue the women's health segment under the title "The Conscious Cunt".
In fact, all of the listeners who called the station during the program and in subsequent days agreed to our use of 'cunt' and felt it would be appropriate to continue using it as we had been, provided we explained our context. Given these results, and the condition that we contextualize our use of the word very specifically each time we were to use it on air, the Board of Directors and the program manager consented to our continued pro- gramming for the women's health segment under the title "the Conscious Cunt". This was a victory for Adamant Eve, a victory for freedom of expression, a victory for proactive radio program- ming and a victory for community involvement in community radio.
In the last few weeks, we have also published the first is- sue of our own 'zine (a locally produced and independently pub- lished magazine), also called Adamant Eve. As we move to expand our media output, the membership of the collective is now shift- ing again; students move home for the summer or leave town for summer employment, and others return to participate in the col- lective now that scholastic pressures have eased until September. This shift guarantees a new twist to our programming as new voices and influences come together to shape new audio (and print) adventures.
Jana Razga is a student at the University of Alberta in Edmon- ton, Canada. Anyone interested in receiving Adamant Eve's Cunt Information package (which includes a cassette copy of the one hour special program, "The Cunt Show" and the Adamant Eve 'zine), please contact Jana at e-mail: jsoukup@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca or by postmail: Jana Soukup Razga Adamant Eve Women's Radio Collective c/o CJSR FM 88.5, Room 224, S.U.B., University of Alberta Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2J7 C A N A D A
---
National Lawyers Guild: defending the rights of micro broadcasters.
By Peter Franck National Lawyers Guild member
"...the FCC is arguably violating its statutory mandate as well as the First Amendment, by refusing to revisit the issue [of the ban on very low power FM broad- casting]... The Court finds that the harm to the First Amendment rights of Defendant and the public at large which may result from enforcing the current regulations, outweighs the slight showing of inter- ference proffered by the government...."
In an almost textbook example of partnership with a growing and vital movement of committed activists, the National Lawyers Guild through its Committee on Democratic Communications (CDC) has been forging a new area of law and giving a vital democratic movement the legal and moral space in which to grow. From "pirate" radio to "micro" radio; from defiantly tweak- ing the nose of authority to developing grass roots, effective, cheap means of piercing the media screen, the Guild and the micro radio movement have been working together to open the radio spec- trum. In an unprecedented move, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, on January 20th, refused to grant the government an injunction against the admittedly un- licensed low power broadcasting of Free Radio Berkeley. For years it has been the law that in order to broadcast over the air, one must have a license. Since the 1970's, the FCC has refused to consider even an application for a license for less than one hundred watts of power. The first level of the license application process involves a pile of forms half an inch thick and a $2,900.00 filing fee. In short, without mega bucks and access to high-priced Washington lawyers, there is no way a citizen can obtain a license to broadcast. Five years ago, the CDC received a plea for help from Mbanna Kantako, an unemployed, blind black man who had scraped together a few hundred dollars for a couple of black boxes which when con- nected to a microphone and an antennae wire out his housing pro- ject window, put him on the air with one watt of power. Mbanna had been involved in organizing the tenants in the John Jay Homes public housing project in Springfield, Illinois. He went on the air as WTRA (W. Tenant's Rights Association). WTRA was the only station serving the Springfield African American Commun- ity. It broadcast music, community news, recorded speeches and much else. Much of the programming and operation of the station was done by Mbanna's sons and other youth from the community. No one bothered them for almost two years, until some kids in the projects reported that housing authority police beat them up. Mbanna put them on the air to tell their story and surprise! The next week the FCC, backed by the local police, was there to shut him down. The CDC had been looking at issues of media reform and had held a major symposium at the 1989 Guild convention on the responsibility of the media under international covenants (against racism, for women's rights and the like). The CDC recognized the importance of radio done cheaply and easily by people, we saw it as the grass roots "green media" of the future. CDC member Alan Korn secured a grant and spent the summer between his second and third years at law school writing a one hundred page brief laying out the Constitutional Law and Interna- tional Law reasons that the ban on micro radio was unconstitu- tional. After fining Mbanna $750.00, the government made no at- tempt to collect, and Mbanna and the CDC decided against bringing an action, so the brief was unused for a little while. Like many of us, Stephen Dunifer was outraged by the media screen and distortion of events surrounding the Gulf War. An electrical engineer by training, Dunifer decided there was noth- ing to do but go on the air himself. When he called, the CDC was ready with its brief. Over subsequent months, it worked with Dunifer and other micro broadcasters to advise them of their rights if and when the FCC knocked on their door. CDC lawyers developed the expertise to deal with the arcane FCC administra- tive structure when, not being satisfied with the uncollected $750.00 fine assessed to Mbanna, they started to assess Dunifer, Richard Edmundson of San Francisco Free Radio and others, fines in the $17,500.00 to $20,000.00 range. Dunifer started building micro radio kits which he could sell to other practitioners and began broadcasting (literally, on the internet) his message of the possibility and the desirability of micro radio. When people asked "Is it legal?" he referred them to the CDC. In true Guild tradition, the CDC assured no one that they could win but we did assure them that under the Consti- tution and International Law they had a Right to Communicate, and that we would do our best to find them legal back-up. We commit- ted to being backup, in turn, for local counsel. All this helped the movement take itself seriously, shift from "pirate" to "mi- cro." Not content with the $20,000.00 fine it has assessed against Dunifer, and impatient with its own procedures (Dunifer's appeal of the fine to the Washington level of the FCC has languished there for over a year), the government filed a 60 page lawsuit in District Court seeking an injunction against Dunifer. In one of the many ironies of this case, it calendared its Motion for a Preliminary Injunction on the 30th anniversary (to the day) of the Free Speech Movement at CAL (remember Mario Savio?). Dunifer was represented personally by CDC member Luke Hiken. The CDC itself prepared an Amicus Brief addressing some of the larger issues which it was to file on behalf of the Guild and the Media Alliance. In a nice little side-flap, the government ob- jected to the filing of the Amicus Brief on the grounds that one of the signers, Peter Franck, had signed along with Luke Hiken a prior Amicus Brief filed with the Ninth Circuit in a similar case coming out of Arizona a year earlier. In classic "shoot yourself in the foot" fashion, the government, in support of its opposi- tion to the filing of the Amicus Brief, filed with the District Court a copy of the Amicus Brief we had filed in the Court of Ap- peals. The opening lines of our Court of Appeals brief revealed the fact that the 9th Circuit Panel had been very interested in the precise issues we were raising and had ordered the government to file a special brief responding to our constitutional argu- ments. Of course, there is no way we ourselves could have legi- timately put that information before the trial court! In a widely circulated article, Alexander Cockburn com- ments: "There's nothing that so horrifies the Federal Communica- tions Commission as freedom of speech - unless its backed by the billions now required to exercise that right on the airwaves." Cockburn goes on: "For more than 60 years, it's been the role of government to restrict access to airwaves to those powerful enough and rich enough to stake out and hold their slice of this public resource. The excuse for restriction has always been 'chaos.' But in the eyes of the FCC, chaos is not 5,000 shopping channels or 200,000 easy listening stations. Chaos is political, possibly seditious, broadcasting."
The NLG has recently retained John Tirpakto coordinate CDC activities. He can be reached at 415-921-5829. See INFOBOX
---
Pacifica at the crossroads: dissent grows at foundation's stations.
By Herman Padilla Pacifica Accountability Committee
46-years old and in a mid-life crisis, that's one good way to describe Pacifica and the mess its in right now. For those of you who do not know, the word Pacifica in Spanish means "peaceful", but for those thousands of programmers, staff, volunteers, and managers who have spent time at one of the 5 main Pacifica sta- tions, peaceful is not a word often used to describe the experi- ence. Pacifica is a non-profit chain consisting of 5 stations and 70 affiliates and subscriber stations that carry Pacifica Network News and other Pacifica programs. Pacifica radio began as an ideal in the mind of Lewis Hill, a Stanford grad, radio reporter, and pacifist conscientious objector during World War II. After the war Hill was a journalist in Washington, DC, and saw the gathering Cold War storm clouds. The station he worked for didn't allow him to talk about it on the air, however, because of management's fear of losing advertisers. So, Hill quit his job, came out to Berkeley, and started KPFA. He believed the key to the vision of Pacifica was listener-sponsorship. Today, every whining pledge drive anywhere in the world can chart its finan- cial DNA back to KPFA. Pacifica goals are laid out in its mission statement. Rough- ly: to encourage and provide outlets for the creative skills and energies of the community which will aid and serve the cultural welfare of the community; to engage in any activity that shall contribute to a lasting understanding between nations and between the individuals of all nations, races, creeds and colors; to gather and disseminate information on the causes of conflict between any and all such groups; through any and all means to promote the study of political and economic problems and of the causes of religious, philosophical and racial antagonisms; to promote the full distribution of public information; to obtain sources in the public presentation of accurate, objective, comprehensive news on all matters vitally affecting the communi- ty. Now let's fast forward some 40 plus years to Houston, Texas -- it is March 19, 1995 and coming down Lovett Boulevard are the Campells, the O'Reillys, the Smiths and others. A bagpiper is leading the way and flags of England, Scotland and Ireland are waving in the breeze. At the parking lot of KPFT, the Pacifica Houston station, the largely Anglo-Saxon marchers are met and cheered by an equally large crowd of Bengali and Hindi-speaking people. This is a protest is over the recent cancellation of the long-running "Music of India" and "Shepherds Hey" programs. In the May 1st, 1995, issue of The Nation magazine, one of the country's oldest and most respected progressive magazines, writ- er Alexander Cockburn feels forced to write about the problems at Pacifica by saying "The Pacifica HQ is waging war without pity on anything of radical or intellectually vivacious timbre." In an LA Times article, Cockburn went even further in denouncing the leadership of Pacifica as "a bunch of spineless self-servers, of elitist preference." In Los Angeles, KPFK -- the second oldest Pacifica station -- has been in turmoil ever since the Pacifica Management fired the General Manager, Program Director, and Assistant GM/accountant earlier in the year. Programmers and volunteers finally actuated their displeasure over the situation with a day-long blue flu walk-out on May 4th,1995. Triggering the protest were a number of union complaints including bad-faith bargaining over a slated 30% lay-off of the station's 17-member staff, and alleged target- ing of perceived "problem" employees for lay-offs by management. Station personnel were also angry with the elimination of the evening news and other programs such as Al Huebner's "Health Department" and Tom Jefferson's pro-marijuana show, "Sturdy Child of Terror." On May 10th, 1995, in Berkeley, California (home of Pacifica flagship station KPFA), 80 people formed a picket line outside the station. They included well-known author Michael Parenti and members of the Lew Hill Society ( a group of people who have left money to Pacifica in their wills). The issue galvanizing the pro- test was the removal of long-time programmer William Mandel. Later, East Bay Reporter Paul Rauber quotes Pacifica management as dismissing the protesters with a newly-coined word -- "Man- deluvians." Why is Pacifica in so much turmoil? Many point a finger right at the top. They say new Executive Director, Pat Scott, who is strong-willed, blunt, and not shy about exercising power, has alienated many people both inside and outside Pacifica's sta- tions. One KPFA listener expressed concerns about Scott's leader- ship that ranged from Scott's radio background to her former membership in the Communist Party USA: "... Pat Scott seems to have all the attributes of a pretty hard-core Stalinist. ... On moving to (the station's) new digs, she was quoted as saying, 'There is going to be no more of this hippie shit.' She has no experience to speak of in grassroots community radio. She rules by a scorched earth policy of personal terrorism and attack." While some may feel the problem is one of personality, others see it in a broader and more historical context. Peter Franck is a former Executive Director of the Pacifica Foundation. He said in an interview with Z Magazine in March, 1994, that the demo- cratic nature of Pacifica was changed as far back as 1961:
"The Pacifica board, about 1961, changed the bylaws to make itself self-perpetu-ating. It changed itself from a board elected by this staff and community to a board that elected its own members. The FCC ruled that was an illegal change of ownership, but they never did anything about that, they didn't fine the station, and nobody took advantage of the FCC ruling to challenge it. It was a real change in the structure. The democratic vision of a direct link between listeners and the structure of the station was lost."
Whether you believe what is happen-ing at Pacifica is person- al or structural in nature is not really of great importance. What really matters is how people of good will must act to save the sole independent nationwide electronic media voice from an unseemly death, while keeping its message strong, distinct, and relevant to the problems of the 90's.
All comments, concerns or criticism can be directed to Herman Padilla at RMWA60A@prodigy.com Or the Pacifica Accountability Committee at pac@sprawl.expressnet.org or tliz@netcom.com See INFOBOX
---
R A D I O B R I E F S . . .
Budapest:
For the first time since last winter, two micro-stations have be- gun broadcasting again in Budapest, Hungary. Civil Radio was on the air in early May at 92.1 MHz. This station is a public ra- dio, broadcasting the opinions of citizens. No politicians! It is operated by the 110 Foundation... Programs against racism, poem-radio, tourism, along with a request for demonstrators from a movement against Hungary's new tuition fee. Music: alterna-tive, progressive, jazz, folk, clas- sical. The 110 Foundation is looking for new collaborators, helpers, etc. Contact: Civil Radio 1011 Budapest Corvin ter 8. Sharing the same frequency is Fiksz Radio (Fix Radio) which is a local radio station. Last summer the Sziget Radio was operated by this station on the Student's Island at Euro- Woodstock. Unfortunately, there is no media- regulation yet and these stations are on the air for a few days and after that only the big, state-run stations remain. This is the situation in Bu- dapest. In the countryside there are 1 - 3 local stations in many towns. They often share the same frequency - one broad- casting in the morning another in the evening, etc.). But this is all. >> Henrik Hargitai: hiik@ludens.elte.hu
Syracuse, NY
"Local radio has failed us, sold us down the river, betrayed its essential mission of expanding our aural World." Quoting from a report called the "State of Buffalo Radio," Simon Morrin states the case for Syracuse Community Radio in issue #3 of "Off the Air", the newsletter of Syracuse Community Radio. This station isn't on the air just yet but this group is working hard to bring its vision of radio to the good folks of Syracuse, New York. They're doing this literally through a series of programs called Radiovision on cable channel 3 each Monday evening. "It is a variety program and its content is intended to reflect the type of programming that will be heard on Syracuse Community Radio when it reaches the airwaves. In effect it is a trial balloon to determine the directions in which SCR will go, what kinds of shows the membership will put together and what will be possible with a member-owned and operated station." Hosts have included local journalist Larry Hoyt and Latin-American broadcaster Fanny Villareal. See INFOBOX
Eastern CANADA:
CKLN Radio in Toronto has just undergone a major bit of upheaval. This pinnacle of political correctness just had four senior staff members resign after a raucous Inter-national Women's Day planning meeting that reportedly (and this is not from the most reputable source) wound up with people throwing furniture. In all honesty I doubt that I'll track down the true details but there are some big problems here. And! Not one, but two campus/community stations in Ontario have unionized their staff! The staffs at both CFRU Guelph and CKCU Ottawa have joined CUPE, the Canadian Union of Public Em- ployees. They are very specific in saying that their Boards are the employers, & they are the employees. What does it say that two of our most prominent (and vocal) non-commercial stations are such poor employers that their staff felt the need to organize? I'm a union supporter, but I can't help but feel sad that our sector is in need of this, instead of Chrysler or Dow Chemical. Oh well. Victoria Fenner, GM of Hamilton, Ontario's CFMU-FM (McMaster University) was told to chop $12,000 off of the station's budget for next year. She has elected to kill off basketball. At least it will be a fairly high profile amputation. (ed. In the U.S. this strategy is referred to as the Washington's Monument plan. Whenever the Park Service is asked to make drastic cuts they offer up closing and ceasing to maintian one of the capitol's most popular tourist attractions...)
Public Radio Lay-offs
Minnesota Public Radio has announced that it will cut 36 staff positions, 13% of its employees, effective immediately (5/20). The 28-station chain of public radio stations takes this ac- tion, according to president Bill Kling, because of threatened CPB cuts and rising paper and postage costs in MPR's lucrative catalog division, Greenspring. Greenspring puts out upscale mail-order catalogs including A Prairie Home Companion's catalog, Seasons, Wireless and Signals. Green-spring brings MPR about $5 milion a year. (ed. Identity crisis here, or what??)
---
INFOBOX INFO BOX I N F O B O X --
Pacifica Accountability Committee PO Box 8827, North Hollywood, CA 91608-0827 (818) 509-8525
Radio For Peace International / Far Right Radio Review PO Box 88, Santa Ana, Costa Rica E-mail rfpicr@sol.racsa.co.cr
Free Radio Berkeley 1442 A Walnut St., #406, Berkeley, CA 94709 E-mail frbspd@crl.com
National Lawyers Guild One Sansome St., Suite 900, San Francisco, CA 94104
Syracuse Community Radio PO Box 6365, Syracuse, NY 13217-6365
RADIO RESISTOR'S BULLETIN PO BOX 3038 BELLINGHAM, WA 98227-3038
The Bulletin is published 4 times a year. It is available in either an e-mai l edi- tion or in a paper edition. Paper editions are $1 each, or 5 isues free when making a $5 sustaining contribu- tion. Back issues are available for $1 each on paper and isses 5-11 are available by e-mail from haulgren@well.com
Articles , letters and comments are encouraged.
Copyright 1995, RRB copy and redistribute ```
| | | --- | | ProcessTree Network TM For-pay Internet distributed processing. | | Advertising helps support hosting Red Rock Eater Digest @ The Commons. Advertisers are not associated with the list owner. If you have any comments about the advertising, please direct them to the Webmaster @ The Commons. |