• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Pacifica disintegrating?

Oscar Madison said:
"Democracy Now" is carried on public radio stations, public television stations, and various cable channels.
Click to expand...

I specifically asked about the "standards" by which Democracy Now could be considered a success on the Pacifica stations

The corporate broadcasting mind-set does not apply to Pacifica. They are not in operation to maximize an audience in order to maximize advertising revenue. You all have decided that they must play your game and you get to make the rules.
Click to expand...

There is no "corporate" mindset involved in wanting your voice to reach a larger group of people. If it reaches few people, the ideas they wish to express and expose are not being heard. If there are so few listeners, what is the purpose of operating?

As an example, the average audience size of Democracy Now at 6 AM on KPFK, in a market of 13,400,000 persons, is 1,000 persons.

If an altruistic endeavor in another field were to have that sort of results, there would be a thorough review of operations and lots of changes. For example, if the Red Cross had an emergency blood drive for victims of a local disaster, and only 11 people gave blood, they would examine everything from the work of their communications department to the attitudes of the public in respect to blood donation. They certainly would not continue "as is".

The only answer to the Pacifica question is the one BigA gives: a bunch of "I´m for me!" individuals with different agendas and no group spirit or ethic.

PS: San Francisco "Bay" is not a bay; it's an estuary.
Click to expand...

Technically, it is just the northeastern section that is a true estuary with a tidal basin. The rest is a bay, and 99.999990% of the 7.5 million folks in the metro area call it a bay and refer to the general zone as "the Bay Area" and not "the Estuary Area".
 
Last edited:
TheBigA said:
I agree, but that's where anarchy once again causes a problem. Normally, we think in terms of consensus or team building. That's not how anarchists think. They think in terms of individuality and the power of one. They're not building an audience, or attracting new followers or potential donors who could potentially help the whole organization. They're just thinking about each individual show. In an organization where money is tight, staffers are members of the union, getting paid the highest wages possible. That would never be done at a small LPFM, where they're mainly volunteers working for free. This is just one of the unique obstacles facing Pacifica.
Click to expand...

Pacifica members are decidedly collectivists...they do NOT think in terms of the individual. Another feature of most political types, liberal or conservative and all in between...they're elitists. Elitists see their contribution to the "cause" as "leadership" and "jurist grande" They are all about injecting great wisdom and insight into the operation by virtue of their superior intellect. The "work" part of the operation...well, that's for "workers" i.e. deplorables.
Pacifica's problems are all based in elitism. Too many leaders and not enough workers. These "leaders" are political and many have absolutely NO business experience. Just like Oscar Madison, they hate business and see the exchange of goods and services as evil. How do you successfully run a business if you hate business?
 
Last edited:
wavo said:
Pacifica members are decidedly collectivists...they do NOT think in terms of the individual.
Click to expand...

I disagree. They are not only isolated individualists, they are selfish egotists. Just read some of the items about their board meetings and programming meetings. Every individual wants their little block of time to talk about their cause or issue, and they have no concern for others and they can not come together even on issues that affect the collective group of program providers and producers.
 
Oscar Madison said:
People who try to overthrow governments always think they have a good reason. Probably that guy talking about Honduras has reasons he considers valid, too. Then again, people who want to stifle free speech always think they have good reason, too.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between free speech and speech that threatens others with harm. Threatening harm is not "free" as it has a possibly mortal cost to those being spoken against.

So if you think it is okay to advocate the assassination of the elected leaders of a Central American government on a Pacifica station, what would you say if someone on any station recommended killing Democrats on sight? Or our own elected officials? Is that protected free speech, too?
 
wavo said:
Pacifica members are decidedly collectivists...they do NOT think in terms of the individual.
Click to expand...

I think that was true of the Pacifica founders. They were mostly socialists, who thought in terms of the collective. If you talk with old timers, people who were there in the 70s, that's what you'll hear. Pacifica was a family to them. Those folks were pushed out at some point, and the focus has clearly gone away from promoting the stations. If socialists were still in power, there would not be the financial situation that currently exists, and the Board would be able to move on some very good options, such as trading stations or selling assets. None of that is happening. You mentioned leaders, and at Pacifica, leaders are not respected. Employees sue the leaders, or undercut their attempts at saving the station. They've gone through a series of GMs and PDs, because they're thankless jobs. But yes, this is an organization that refuses to take corporate grants. They will only accept individual contributions. As you know, NPR & PBS stations couldn't exist if that was the case.
 
Last edited:
I get the impression that Oscar dislikes radio, radio people and business. That impression might be wrong but from how I interpret his words, I gather these are chips on his shoulder. I can't change that if that is the case. He has his opinion and is entitled to it.

The truism is that non-profits and for profit entities engage in business. Business is defined as an entity that provides a product or service or retails such and is either a for profit or a not for profit entity. To conduct business is more of an action word. Money is much the same way. You might hate the monetary system but you still have to operate in a monetary-influenced environment. You just can't escape it. Much the same for the word business.

If the message or mission is to be heard, then the objective, assuming that it is the reason for Pacifica airing it's programming, is being heard by very few and thus, quite ineffective in it's outreach. The numbers show that. The finances show that. As David mentioned, any other non-profit would likely modify their plan to reach more people. Why? It furthers their mission. To think 'expanding' that reach, I gather from comments, is evil and corporate thinking but that is wrong-headed thinking. The most successful non-profits think 'how can I reach more people' and develop business plans to do so.

To ignore expanding the reach reminds me of some conversations with small college streaming only stations so set on being cutting edge, they don't promote and wind up with only the people that are involved with the station being their core audience. Most have been so insignificant, the student funding had been cut off long ago and they had to become an independent club, self-funding. One poor station netted $11 from a spring on air fundraiser and wound up being heard only in a lobby of a residence hall. One guy actually admitted there were more listeners in that lobby than they ever had online at any given time. For all of them, a focus on building awareness might have meant success, but frankly they felt their product was 'too cool' to promote to the masses.
 
b-turner said:
I get the impression that Oscar dislikes radio, radio people and business. That impression might be wrong but from how I interpret his words, I gather these are chips on his shoulder. I can't change that if that is the case. He has his opinion and is entitled to it.

The truism is that non-profits and for profit entities engage in business. Business is defined as an entity that provides a product or service or retails such and is either a for profit or a not for profit entity. To conduct business is more of an action word. Money is much the same way. You might hate the monetary system but you still have to operate in a monetary-influenced environment. You just can't escape it. Much the same for the word business.

If the message or mission is to be heard, then the objective, assuming that it is the reason for Pacifica airing it's programming, is being heard by very few and thus, quite ineffective in it's outreach. The numbers show that. The finances show that. As David mentioned, any other non-profit would likely modify their plan to reach more people. Why? It furthers their mission. To think 'expanding' that reach, I gather from comments, is evil and corporate thinking but that is wrong-headed thinking. The most successful non-profits think 'how can I reach more people' and develop business plans to do so.

To ignore expanding the reach reminds me of some conversations with small college streaming only stations so set on being cutting edge, they don't promote and wind up with only the people that are involved with the station being their core audience. Most have been so insignificant, the student funding had been cut off long ago and they had to become an independent club, self-funding. One poor station netted $11 from a spring on air fundraiser and wound up being heard only in a lobby of a residence hall. One guy actually admitted there were more listeners in that lobby than they ever had online at any given time. For all of them, a focus on building awareness might have meant success, but frankly they felt their product was 'too cool' to promote to the masses.
Click to expand...

What I dislike are hypocrisy and businesses the lack integrity. These two qualities often go together. Your position is quite reasonable. Pacifica, like any organization, should be judged on how well they perform their stated purpose and live up to their stated principles. Not on how well they meet the purposes and principles somebody else thinks they ought to have. Pacifica - and that college radio station you mentioned - seem to do well according their own purposes and principles. In contrast, NPR espouses lofty principles and routinely disregards them. That's hypocrisy.

Maybe Pacifica stations can be described as hobby stations. If an individual or group can afford a hobby and aren't hurting anyone, I have no problem.
 
DavidEduardo said:


This is one of those cases where politics and radio are inextricably combined. Going back to the heritage of the founders of Pacifica, which was based on the early peaceful resistance movement that is this very week the subject of a wide-release Hollywood movie, the organization has a very politicized social agenda.

So discussing the nature of dissent or resistance is a part of understanding Pacifica. "Pacifica" in Latin can mean "peace" or "peaceable" depending on the context. It's not a reference to the Pacific Ocean, despite having sprung up on a bay of that body of water.

The issue is when does resistance infringe on the rights of others and the context is whether Pacifica, the radio group, makes a distinction between proper and over-the-edge.

P.S. Under what standards do you consider "Democracy Now" a success on the Pacifica stations? It is listened to by nearly nobody.
Click to expand...

Democracy Now has the Brand recognition though. I admit Democracy now isn't my cup of tea though but its the most sane of all the Pacifica shows. I understand from some of your rants you went after Pacifica's other shows for being too insane for you. Democracy Now has a cult following but its not as big as the NPR/PRI/PRX/APM shows though. Or even the insane talk shows that have to please Trump at all costs.
 
RadioPatrol said:
Democracy Now has the Brand recognition though. I admit Democracy now isn't my cup of tea though but its the most sane of all the Pacifica shows. I understand from some of your rants you went after Pacifica's other shows for being too insane for you. Democracy Now has a cult following but its not as big as the NPR/PRI/PRX/APM shows though. Or even the insane talk shows that have to please Trump at all costs.
Click to expand...

Describing and questioning the ethics of allowing on the air a program that advocates killing the elected President, Senators and members of the Cabinet of a sovereign nation is hardly a "rant", sir. Inciting violence and murder is not "insane", it is illegal.

The "cult following" of Democracy Now's first run at 6 AM on KPFK averages about 1,000 persons (AQH) in a market with 13,500,000 persons. That's a rating of 0.0 and it's not a cult following, it's no following.
 
DavidEduardo said:


Describing and questioning the ethics of allowing on the air a program that advocates killing the elected President, Senators and members of the Cabinet of a sovereign nation is hardly a "rant", sir. Inciting violence and murder is not "insane", it is illegal.

The "cult following" of Democracy Now's first run at 6 AM on KPFK averages about 1,000 persons (AQH) in a market with 13,500,000 persons. That's a rating of 0.0 and it's not a cult following, it's no following.
Click to expand...

https://www.thenation.com/article/pacifica-radio-worth-saving/. Even this article said something that's backs the "questionable programming" at Pacifica. This article said about infomercials being aired at WBAI-FM. And its Snake oil being sold.
 
http://www.radiosurvivor.com/2016/11/13/donald-trump-just-save-pacifica-radio/ has an article about Pacifica. Trump is a glimmer of hope. But basically unless a sugar daddy drops dead and leaves them millions, I don't see how they can survive. They just defaulted on their 2015 pension plan payments, haven't gotten their 2014 or 15 audits done yet therefore have lost their CPB match. And KPFK in Los Angeles just lost a labor arbitration for $250K.
 
radiotwit said:
KPFK in Los Angeles just lost a labor arbitration for $250K.
Click to expand...

The staff is sucking them dry. Not what the founders intended.

Sure, Trump should be a motivation for them to band together to fight the new enemy. But they have already met the enemy, and it is themselves.
 
WBAI, NY and WPFW, Washington DC are losing money like crazy. LA is starting to now. Berkeley doesn't have the chops to support 4 stations. Pacifica has 4-5 million in debt (not including Democracy Now I think) so I think the fat lady is in dress rehearsals.
 
TheBigA said:
The staff is sucking them dry. Not what the founders intended.

Sure, Trump should be a motivation for them to band together to fight the new enemy. But they have already met the enemy, and it is themselves.
Click to expand...

As they are now, Pacifica going after Trump would be like some kid going after Rambo with a water pistol...
 
radiotwit said:
WBAI, NY and WPFW, Washington DC are losing money like crazy. LA is starting to now. Berkeley doesn't have the chops to support 4 stations. Pacifica has 4-5 million in debt (not including Democracy Now I think) so I think the fat lady is in dress rehearsals.
Click to expand...

I believe that LA donations have been less than the costs for a number of years now... going back to the internal strife and bitterness coming from the re-structuring of programming a few years back that resulted in many shows being cancelled, others being shortened or rearranged and some new things added. This was accompanied by a further decrease in listening.

Their block programming model is more relevant today for podcasting than for a radio station.
 
RadioPatrol said:
Apparently William Crosier has been appointed as Executive director for Pacifica. Umm?? But It means nothing though until we have evidence that Pacifica goes bankrupt.
Click to expand...

The press release completely ignores the group's financial woes, and instead brings up the election, as though it has anything to do with anything. Crosier knows the real truth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom