PBS, WNET Should Adjust Moral Compass

What’s
Wrong Today
:


WNET is the NYC affiliate of PBS. It broadcasts on Channel 13 in the greater
New York area. WNET has a storied history, but it needs to adjust its moral compass, which is starting to point towards money, not
towards true north. WNET has (again) been caught doing the bidding of
plutocrats. From last Friday’s New York Times:


WNET, the New York
City public television broadcaster, said on Friday that it would return a $3.5
million grant it received to sponsor an ambitious project on public pensions in
the face of charges that it solicited inappropriate underwriting for the series


WNET said
production on the planned series, dubbed “Pension
Peril
,” would be suspended indefinitely after journalist David Sirota of PandoDaily revealed the money
was coming from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation (LJAF). Arnold was an oil
trader at the disgraced Enron, who became one of the youngest billionaires in
the US. He is also a member of the WNET Board of Trustees.


Mr. Sirota
reported:


Arnold has been
using massive contributions to politicians, Super PACs, ballot
initiative efforts
,
think
tanks

and local
front groups

to finance a nationwide political campaign aimed at slashing public employees’
retirement benefits…According to its own promotional materials, the Arnold
Foundation is pushing lawmakers in
states across the country “to stop promising a (retirement) benefit” to public
employees.


PandoDaily went on to report
that PBS and WNET had originally approached the foundation: (emphasis by the
Wrongologist)


The foundation’s
spokesperson said PBS executives approached Arnold “with the proposal for the
series, having become aware of LJAF’s interest” in shaping public pension
policy, and moving that policy toward
cutting retirement benefits for public workers


Apparently,
Pension Peril will still be aired on public
television outlets, but the Arnold money will be returned. Pension Peril includes an episode on California public pensions. That segment discusses a ballot
initiative being pushed in the state to roll back public employee pensions − a campaign
being partially funded by, wait for it, John D. Arnold
. The initiative
is run by San Jose Mayor, Chuck Reed (D), and Reed has thanked
“people from the Arnold Foundation” for putting him in touch with other
funders.


That’s not
a clear conflict of interest?


After the Arnold/pensions
relationship became public, PBS and WNET rethought having the Arnold Foundation
provide the funding for the Pension Peril
project. The Times reports that Stephen
Segaller, WNET’s VP for programming, said: (emphasis by the Wrongologist)

We made a mistake,
pure and simple. We all take very, very seriously
any suggestion that there’s a perception
problem
about the integrity of our work or the sources of our funding, and
we came to the conclusion that it’s better to err on the side of caution


He added
that the grant had been solicited with “absolute conviction” that the
foundation was an acceptable funder. In other words, WNET still doesn’t believe
that there was any actual
conflict here — it just believes that there’s “a perception problem”. WNET is
returning the money because of “the optics” — which is to say, because Sirota’s
article came out, and it made both WNET and PBS look bad.


PBS’s
Ombudsman, Michael Getler wrote about the Arnold’s funding:


It
shines a light, once again, on what seems to me to be ethical compromises in
funding arrangements and lack of real transparency for viewers caused, in part,
by the complicated funding demands needed to support public broadcasting, and
in part by managers who make some questionable decisions


Apparently,
WNET’s management issue with the Arnold Foundation deal was not that the
content of the Pension Peril series
was too aligned with corporate interests, rather, it was the “optics” for WNET
and PBS!


This
shows us once again, the cynicism on the right. They have steadily campaigned
for the withdrawal of public funding from PBS since the Reagan administration. But, now that they have gotten the government off the horse, the right is busy saddling up.


This is not the first time that WNET
has had a problem with politically active plutocrats. In May, 2013, Jane
Mayer of the New Yorker wrote that two PBS-affiliated
documentaries featuring the Koch
Family
came under pressure to be censored and edited due to fear that Charles
and David Koch, who, in addition to being the primary funders of conservative political
causes, are major donors to public media, would withdraw support.


David Koch has contributed to cultural and medical institutions including
Lincoln Center. In the 1980s, he expanded his charitable contributions to media,
donating $23 million to public television over the years. In 1997, he began serving as a trustee
of Boston’s public-broadcaster, WGBH, and he subsequently also became a trustee of WNET.


One film,
by Academy Award winning director Alex Gibney, Park Avenue: Money, Power &
The American Dream
, received close scrutiny and was almost pulled, before
some edits and a compromise
format that included a rebuttal conversation at the program’s conclusion by Koch
and Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) were agreed by the producers and WNET.


Another
project, Citizen
Koch
,
a documentary about the Citizens
United
Supreme Court decision, was subject to editorial arm-twisting by
WNET representatives. Subsequently, WNET prevailed on ITVS, an independent
film production company based in San Francisco to withdraw funding of Citizen
Koch.


The film production
ultimately collapsed, and the producers’ statement said:


ITVS
backed out of the partnership because they came to fear the reaction our film
would provoke. David Koch, whose political activities are featured in the film,
happens to be a public-television funder and a trustee of both WNET and WGBH.
This wasn’t a failed negotiation or a divergence of visions; it was censorship,
pure and simple…It’s the very thing our film is about—public servants bowing to
pressures, direct or indirect, from high-dollar donors


David
Koch was not mollified, and he resigned from the WNET Board of Trustees in May,
2013. Now, you could say that WNET is standing up to the plutocrats, since
David Koch was lost as a funding source, but consider the overriding issues:


First,
that public television is just another commercial mass media venture, one where
its advertisers are rich individuals and their foundations, instead of corporations
serving the mass market. As such, they have become very adept at creating programming
which represents the interests of their funding sources.


Second,
the management of WNET has lost focus on what independent journalism requires, tilting
toward the effort to fund its programming, instead the work of informing the
public.


He who pays the piper
will always call the tune. Soon, PBS could stand for the Plutocrat’s
Broadcasting Service.

Facebooklinkedinrss
terry mckenna

I was a regular contibutor to WNET but stopped a year ago because of this very issue. Wrote a note to their president too. He responded, but in the usual evasive manner.

The Wrongologist

@ Terry: I am a long-time viewer of the NewsHour. However, I take exception to their growing commitment to a “crossfire” type discussion of issues. I can get the Club for Growth or the Heritage Foundation viewpoint on Fox at any point that I require it.  I do not need to hear it on the NewsHour. This is another example of the corporatization of PBS, and the growing influence of their plutocrat funders on the shape of discussions on PBS.