Submitted by Doug Colbert (not verified) on June 25, 2008 - 6:08pm.
When WYPR’s management pulled the plug on the Marc Steiner Show because of “fundamental, philosophical differences”, the Maryland public lost an independent perspective on government policy and corporate practices. While the impact may seem less dramatic than a moving company’s overnight hijacking of Baltimore’s beloved Colts, the long-term consequences represent a direct hit on democracy and on public radio’s duty to present diverse viewpoints not easily obtainable elsewhere.
That was, after all, Congress’ main objective when passing the 1967 Public Communications Act. The Carnegie Commission Report had called for a publicly funded, non-commercial public broadcasting service to be a host “forum for debate and controversy” and “provide a voice for groups in the community that may otherwise be unheard.” Congress intended that the “alternative” Corporation for Public Broadcasting would express “diversity and excellence” and produce cutting edge reporting to supplement traditional news. For fifteen years, Steiner programming was committed to fulfilling these promises.
Public radio listeners became accustomed to hearing critics and defenders argue both sides of controversial issues, ranging from crime and education policy to the Iraq War and Constellation Energy’s takeover of Maryland utilities. Hearing people directly affected - - families of soldiers in Iraq, consumers and the front line activists - - encouraged listeners to join the conversation and consider alternative solutions. As Jefferson and Madison understood, an informed and participatory citizenry is the best guarantee for sustaining a flourishing democracy.
Steiner challenged guests and listeners to consider issues systemically. A crime discussion went beyond stereotypes and the usual hard line on punishment to considering race and class implications. Activists working with Black youth delivered a more positive image and experienced professionals presented hopeful messages for reform. Education discussions brought teachers and students together who articulated what elected leaders needed to do to reverse public education’s decline. Immigrant workers’ first-hand accounts helped bridge the gap between citizen and non-citizen communities. People tuning to Steiner public radio learned from others, while moving closer to a unified community.
YPR’s Board must remain committed to presenting divergent viewpoints about controversial issues. During the first three months of Steiner’s replacement show, invited guests have been predominantly male and white. Fewer minority voices and community activists appear. Instead of independent critics, YPR relies on mainstream news reporters, particularly from the Sun, whose radio viewpoint mirrors their edited articles. The WYPR and Sun relationship illustrates corporate media’s increasing monopoly over public access and First Amendment right to information.
Content-wise, YPR’s mid-day programming also has shifted noticeably. By design, the station’s website applauds more mixing of “not so serious” with “serious” subjects with “a certain politeness, good manners and gentle laughter.” Consequently, less air time is given to controversies about the War, official use of power, human rights and critical perspectives. More programs focus on neutral subjects about crab cake recipes, spring and summer activities, crab grass and the one millionth word. When a human rights violator like China is the show’s subject, the two invited guests share business backgrounds and discuss the country’s investment potential, not Tibet and Darfur. YPR’s website fails to mention that one guest has substantial financial interests in China.
The station’s dependence on corporate funding for more than half of its’ revenue may explain why it no longer produces shows critical of business and prominently displays Constellation Energy on its webpage. Corporate advertising improves public image and also influences programming choices. Consider YPR’s recent, two-hour broadcast about beginning a business. No similar air time has been devoted to assist people searching for jobs or promotions that pay the bills.
Since the Steiner firing, the YPR Board has met twice and heaped praise on current management. No Board member questioned the station’s programming and lack of viewpoint and guest diversity. No one asked to hear from the many YPR listeners who attended both meetings. To the contrary, most seemed content with hearing management’s report on revenue and station ratings, issues more befitting commercial radio and an aggressive entrepreneur style that seeks to capture the biggest portion of market share.
The absence of disagreement may not be surprising considering the Board’s lack of diversity. Members are almost exclusively white, wealthy and privileged. Perhaps this is common in a corporate setting but managing public radio has different challenges than to satisfy shareholders quest for profit. Serving the public interest and meeting public radio’s educational mission requires that the Board embrace the entire Your Public Radio community. The YPR Board and listening audience has considerable work to do to ensure that public radio represents the democratic voice of the many and not of the selected few.
WYPR & The Mission of Public Radio
When WYPR’s management pulled the plug on the Marc Steiner Show because of “fundamental, philosophical differences”, the Maryland public lost an independent perspective on government policy and corporate practices. While the impact may seem less dramatic than a moving company’s overnight hijacking of Baltimore’s beloved Colts, the long-term consequences represent a direct hit on democracy and on public radio’s duty to present diverse viewpoints not easily obtainable elsewhere.
That was, after all, Congress’ main objective when passing the 1967 Public Communications Act. The Carnegie Commission Report had called for a publicly funded, non-commercial public broadcasting service to be a host “forum for debate and controversy” and “provide a voice for groups in the community that may otherwise be unheard.” Congress intended that the “alternative” Corporation for Public Broadcasting would express “diversity and excellence” and produce cutting edge reporting to supplement traditional news. For fifteen years, Steiner programming was committed to fulfilling these promises.
Public radio listeners became accustomed to hearing critics and defenders argue both sides of controversial issues, ranging from crime and education policy to the Iraq War and Constellation Energy’s takeover of Maryland utilities. Hearing people directly affected - - families of soldiers in Iraq, consumers and the front line activists - - encouraged listeners to join the conversation and consider alternative solutions. As Jefferson and Madison understood, an informed and participatory citizenry is the best guarantee for sustaining a flourishing democracy.
Steiner challenged guests and listeners to consider issues systemically. A crime discussion went beyond stereotypes and the usual hard line on punishment to considering race and class implications. Activists working with Black youth delivered a more positive image and experienced professionals presented hopeful messages for reform. Education discussions brought teachers and students together who articulated what elected leaders needed to do to reverse public education’s decline. Immigrant workers’ first-hand accounts helped bridge the gap between citizen and non-citizen communities. People tuning to Steiner public radio learned from others, while moving closer to a unified community.
YPR’s Board must remain committed to presenting divergent viewpoints about controversial issues. During the first three months of Steiner’s replacement show, invited guests have been predominantly male and white. Fewer minority voices and community activists appear. Instead of independent critics, YPR relies on mainstream news reporters, particularly from the Sun, whose radio viewpoint mirrors their edited articles. The WYPR and Sun relationship illustrates corporate media’s increasing monopoly over public access and First Amendment right to information.
Content-wise, YPR’s mid-day programming also has shifted noticeably. By design, the station’s website applauds more mixing of “not so serious” with “serious” subjects with “a certain politeness, good manners and gentle laughter.” Consequently, less air time is given to controversies about the War, official use of power, human rights and critical perspectives. More programs focus on neutral subjects about crab cake recipes, spring and summer activities, crab grass and the one millionth word. When a human rights violator like China is the show’s subject, the two invited guests share business backgrounds and discuss the country’s investment potential, not Tibet and Darfur. YPR’s website fails to mention that one guest has substantial financial interests in China.
The station’s dependence on corporate funding for more than half of its’ revenue may explain why it no longer produces shows critical of business and prominently displays Constellation Energy on its webpage. Corporate advertising improves public image and also influences programming choices. Consider YPR’s recent, two-hour broadcast about beginning a business. No similar air time has been devoted to assist people searching for jobs or promotions that pay the bills.
Since the Steiner firing, the YPR Board has met twice and heaped praise on current management. No Board member questioned the station’s programming and lack of viewpoint and guest diversity. No one asked to hear from the many YPR listeners who attended both meetings. To the contrary, most seemed content with hearing management’s report on revenue and station ratings, issues more befitting commercial radio and an aggressive entrepreneur style that seeks to capture the biggest portion of market share.
The absence of disagreement may not be surprising considering the Board’s lack of diversity. Members are almost exclusively white, wealthy and privileged. Perhaps this is common in a corporate setting but managing public radio has different challenges than to satisfy shareholders quest for profit. Serving the public interest and meeting public radio’s educational mission requires that the Board embrace the entire Your Public Radio community. The YPR Board and listening audience has considerable work to do to ensure that public radio represents the democratic voice of the many and not of the selected few.