TeleVISIONS (January/February 1976)

16 eR e CPB should prepare a manual and a series of workshops for education of in dividua] station management on these rele° vant issues. Strategies for its implementation The CPB Board of Directors made a resolution at its November meeting to “review the Task Force programming — policy recommendations and to act on those recommendations that will assure that all CPB-funded programs present a diverse, representative and balanced image of women.” The Board directed management to do the same with the employment recommendations and added that within three months and annually thereafter that management prepare a report on actions taken in these areas. This first report is due at the next CPB meeting on Feb. 10. A key phrase in this response is ‘“‘to act on those recommendations.” Donna Allen, Editor of Media Report to Women, pointed out that this should be understood clearly to mean that the Board has not yet accepted any or each of the recommendations in the report, and has only accepted the existence of discrimination which it is Virtually impossible for anyone at this point | to ignore. Ms. Allen went on to say that if CPB had wanted to do anything about its unfair treat: ment of women, they could have instituted action long ago. What they have now is a report which makes the information public, but a report which they could also use to delude both Congress and the public into believing that self-criticism necessarily leads to change within the industry, thus Staving off any further attacks from the outside. Cathy Irwin, member of the Task Force, ACNO, and NOW vice-president for public relations, emphasized that CPB is currently under a certain amount of pressure to. show constructive changes in its employment practices relating to women and minorities. In April, 1976 the Senate Com munications Committee will conduct “Oversight hearings’ to deal with the long-range funding of CPB and is obliged to consider the equal opportunities issue based on a compromise made at last year’s hearings when the Stokes Amendment was presented by the Black Congressional caucus and dropped in favor of public hearings on the employment question this year. Before Congress considers its apPropriation to Public Broadcasting this spring, one immediate strategy, proposed by sympathetic forces inside and outside the industry, amounts to an citizen group campaign to further pressure both CPB and Congress into action on fairness demands. On a national level the concept of a citizen’s united front seems to hold together in the form of organizations such as the Ad Hoc Committee for Better Broadcasting, which is made up of: NAACP, ACNO, NOW, Black Media Coalition, National Citizens Committee for Broadcasting, Citizen’s Communication Center, National Council of American Indians, National Council of Negro Women and others. This coalition will testify at the Oversight’ hearings before Congress in April. On a. local level they urge citizens to form advisory groups which can represent community needs and then bring these demands to local public broadcasting stations. A problem with this tactic lies with the difficulty of forcing accountability on the part of public broadcasters to their communities. : Irwin also pointed to the danger of women and ethnic minorities being isolated and pitted against each other for whatever small piece of the pie broadcasters make available. Both face the worst prospects of program underwriting, since most of this comes from corporations which are unwilling to take “risks,” and both face similar problems of tokenism. intensive. Tangible CPB action The only tangible action at the Corporation so far has been the appointment of a temporary head of women’s affairs, whose primary task is selecting the permanent head and making a report on her progress at the February CPB Board meeting. Ultimately, the women’s office shall be merged with the minority affairs and training/personnel officials into a department of “human resources” at CPB. | The basic question comes down to implementation: how will any of the recommendations in the Women’s Task Force Report and any of the ‘minority reports” of previous years be enforced? CPB manage ment suggests that change will occur. through the sensitivization of station managers and program producers to the issues, and the creation of incentives for their cooperation. No specifics are as yet being offered in this area. Media action groups urge citizens to organize in their communities and pressure their congresspeople and local station management to deal with the issues. The FCC is currently considering (prompted by the petitions of citizens groups) having public broadcast stations meet the same requirements for ascertaining community needs — the periodic survey of community input into their public station's programming content — that commercial stations now must meet. A decision on this question is expected in February. Copies of the Task Force Report are available from CPB, 1111 16th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036. Citizens Seek More TV Public Affairs Two recent developments indicate that the subject of public-affairs programming on television is attracting widespread attention from the public-interest community. The National Citizens Committee for Broadcasting, the media reform organization headed by former FCC Commissioner Nicholas Johnson, has enlisted more than 30 national organizations to support its “modest proposal” for a minimum of one hour of prime time public affairs programming per week from each local broadcaster and another from each network. The NCCB effort has attracted major groups like the Consumer Federation of America, NAACP, National Organization for Women, the United Auto Workers, and many others. The plea is for broadcasters to comply voluntarily, and at deadline one broadcast group — Westinghouse — has agreed to support the drive. The Coalition for Public Affairs Programming is a newly created group seeking an alteration of policy by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and other public TV entities regarding public affairs. Among the prime organizers are Michael Shamberg of TVTV and Peter Hoffman, a Los Angeles attorney. At press time other independent video producers and public-interest groups were being added to the effort to encourage the CPB Board at their Feb. 11 meeting to consider supporting a fundraising effort that would provide a greater pool of production money for independent public-affairs programs that would appear on PBS. Discussions between the two groups may result in a combined and broadened effort to increase the amount and quality of public affairs shows on American tele vision. For information write NCCB, 1346" Connecticut Avenue, Suite 415, Washington, D.C. 20036, or Coalition for Public Affairs Programming, 1800 Avenue of the: Stars, Suite 900, Los Angeles, CA 90067. citizen media activism. Felix Gut =a Theory and Practice Join at Calif. Conference By FREDERICK HORSTMANN The Communication Research and Action Union, an informal network of researchers and activists, held the West Coast Critical Communications Conference at Stanford University’s Department of Communication on December 29-31,1975. Some 250 theorists and activists from San Diego to Vancouver attended 30 lectures, workshops, _ film screenings, and video and audio presentations. The goal of the conference was to bring together communications theory and practice. Keynote speaker Herbert Schiller, of the University of California at San Diego, stressed the fact that monopoly capitalism, as a global economic and political system, is facing a state of total crisis which should be a major consideration in communications work. Dallas Smythe, Simon Fraser University, presented a paper ‘‘Communication: Blindspot of Western Marxism”and argued that communication in a capitalist social system is a form of work whereby, for instance, people learn how to distinguish brand names and dust the furniture by watching television. Oscar Gandy, Stanford University, moderated a panel on methods for critical research at which Phil Jacklin, Committee for Open Media, called for an ’unselfish” brid je between academic _ fese fe California State University Northridge, argued that activists must seek a new level of work and organization—that the earlier emphasis on petitions to deny license renewal and employment must be analyzed within the power structure of capitalist media systems. Workshops were held on such topics as new models of broadcast ownership and management, images, issues and employment of women in the media, the consequences of media deregulation, and communication and social change in third world countries. As an outgrowth of the American Indian Movement’s workshop “The News Blackout of the Undeclared War Against Native Americans” the conference ended with a news conference where AIM announced its intent to address the bicentennial joint congressional meeting in July. It was a major achievement for a large group of critical communication theorists and activists to meet each other and exchange ideas and experiences. Yet, the general impoverished condition of critical communications theory and the largely unrecognized contradictions of communications activism suggest that only a first step in along journey has been taken. Contradictions in citizen activism include the illusion that it is possible to reform away the ills of capitalism through enforcement of the Fairness Doctrine, employment of women and minorities in the media, etc. While alternative media systems may lead to what appears as a “community solution,” counterculture, in general, functions to neutralize and diffuse progress toward a_ fundamental transformation of the social system. As Herbert Schiller has said, ‘diversity is no virtue in an advanced (capitalist) industrial state.” In the final plenary session, proposals to hold another conference in early summer and to start a newsletter were widely supported. NSF Stalls On ‘Science For Citizens’ By ANNE WEISMAN The National Science Foundation hasannounced plans for a new congressionally mandated program, tentatively titled ‘Science for Citizens.” The program is aimed at improving understanding of technologically rooted public policy issues, facilitating participation of experts in public activities, and enabling the acquisition of technical expertise by non-profit public interest groups. NSF recently held seven regional hearings to elicit public opinion and suggestions for the proposal. Suffering from a lack of focus, the hearings were nevertheless able to identify some key areas for support, including direct participation in the structure and operation of Science for Citizens, direct allocation of funds to public advocacy groups, and participation by credible, well recognized groups, possibly in the form of “mini-grants.” But Barbara Sands, spokesperson for NSF, fears these suggestions are “fraught with danger” and asserts that NSF “can’t be in a position of really supporting advocacy groups.” The Foundation instead favors a program of regranting through a state-based center, possibly with matching funds from the National Endowment for the Humanities. Their proposal to Congress will probably also include support for continuing education, fellowship grants to professors for consultant work, and a television-based format for dissemination of information. NSF's past ord revenie a mronereny j for support to think tanks, academic institutions, and other non-citizen-based groups. Ellis Mottur, technological assistant to Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) who heads the National Science Foundation ‘Special Subcommittee, expresses concern for the “lack of credibility” NSF has with those directly involved in the public interest movement. Whether the National Science Foundation chooses to support the needs and desires expressed by citizens, or whether they choose what is “feasible for NSF to do” (Barbara Sands) will become evident when the final program outline is presented in February for congressional approval and appropriations. Gay Media Two national conferences of gay men and lesbians in late 1975 featured panels, speakers, and workshops on media issues. The Bicentennial Conference on Gays and the Federal Government, sponsored by the Washington, D.C., Gay Activists Alliance, brought together more than 200 organizers. Participants were briefed about national efforts to influence network programming, largely through the efforts of the National Gay Task Force in NY. A panel featuring representatives of local Philadelphia, Boston and Washington media action groups told of successes in building relations with TV broadcasters, radio programming and videotapes. The Gay Academic Union’s annual meeting on Thanksgiving included two panels on media — one on the gay media itself, and another on broadcast images of gays. In addition to gay activists a representative of the CBS Standards & Practices department participated. TeleVISIONS is preparing a comprehensive round-up of local and national gay media projects. If you wish to plug in, write David Sasser, 70 8th Ave #2B, Brooklyn, NY 11217.