volume 8 number 2, February 2006

KUAC Task Force Finished: A Report
by D. Helfferich

A few months ago, I volunteered to serve on the task force assembled by Murray Richmond to deal with the flap that resulted from KUAC’s programming changes July 2005 (in particular, the cancellation of several radio shows) and the public reaction to them. The KUAC Community Task Force has now finished meeting, but did not complete all the tasks it set for itself, nor come to agreement on certain issues.

There has been little in the way of news about the programming controversy or the task force in either the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner or The Ester Republic; however, the Sun Star’s Matt Emmons has regularly covered both, reporting on the KUAC Listeners Alliance and the task force meetings. Numerous letters to the editor, guest opinions, and editorials have been published about the affair, in newspapers across the state and on blogs. A final report will be made available to the public via download from KUAC’s website; as of this writing the site provides links to PDF files of the minutes for the first five of the eight meetings, plus an audio recording of the KUAC Community Forum, held December 7.

The task force decided to work on five things: the context of the programming changes and how KUAC came to its decisions; developing a way to give the public a chance to feel heard (the public forum was one result); the organizational place of KUAC within the university; the value and form of a community advisory board; and discussion of and resolution if possible of the programming concerns that had been raised by the public. The group met in November, December, and January, and formed two subcommittees: one to organize the forum, and another to work on the guidelines for a community advisory board to KUAC.

The forum was extremely successful in terms of participation: at least 170 people showed up, and about 75 testified. The task force was united in recommending that an advisory group should be formed, but the report shows more ambivalence with regard to how it should be formed. Below is an except from the concluding statements in the report:

As the task force carried out its work, it heard a constant refrain: people supported KUAC. It was not unusual to hear people praise the station even as they were launching into the reasons why they were upset and disillusioned with the recent programming changes. Therefore it is important to view the criticism of the programming changes as constructive criticism brought by a loyal listenership intent on improving and strengthening KUAC.…

As the KUAC Task Force considered the issues before it, there were many details on which we failed to achieve consensus. Nevertheless, the task force is united in its support for both KUAC and its listeners. And these differences should not obscure the principal observations and recommendations of the Task Force:

A. KUAC radio is overwhelmingly admired and supported by its many listeners.

B. There is significant concern about the long-term decline in public funding for public broadcasting and the state and national context in which that decline is occurring.

C. Many listeners feel that their concerns about last summer's programming changes were not heard or respected.

D. The Task Force is unanimous in its recommendation that the university establish a KUAC community advisory committee to advise the station management as to the interests, needs, and desires of the community, primarily with regard to programming, policy, and the delivery of service.

E. The Task Force was split in its attitudes on the July 2005 programming changes. A majority believes that it is essential for KUAC to reconsider these programming changes. However, a sizable minority felt that the station should have the freedom to make changes without bending to pressure from any outside body.

The task force agreed to meet for a short period, but decided that some of the issues addressed “have proven thornier than can be resolved in such a short period.” The report closes: “This work should be concluded by a group of individuals committed to serve as advisors to KUAC for the long term: the KUAC Advisory [Board/Council/Group].”

One area of disagreement was on how board members should be selected. The report outlines several options on the election or appointment of potential members. Another area was whether the proper term for an advisory body was board, council, or group. An important area of agreement was in the basic purpose and duties of such a body:

The essential purpose for the Advisory Board/Council is to provide the station a means of gathering information about community concerns and expectations of KUAC and passing them on to the station to use in their decision-making process. The Board/Council will serve as an important link between the public and station.

1. Purpose. The purpose of the Board/Council is to advise the station management as to the interests, needs, and desires of the community, primarily with regard to programming, policy, and the delivery of service.

2. Duties. The duties of the Board/Council will be a) to inform itself as to public broadcasting issues and policies, as well as local station operations; b) to make itself aware by personal contact with community members and other means of the interests and desires of the community with regard to various issues, including station programming, policy, and delivery of service; and c) to transmit to the station such recommendations and advice as it sees fit.

Consensus couldn’t be reached on additional duties, however.

The report also includes options on KUAC’s placement in the university’s organizational structure and arguments pro and con for each option; three position statements on the programming concerns and whether the station should reconsider or reinstate the cancelled radio shows (the task force could not come to consensus on this and so chose to lay out the rationales for the three main viewpoints of the group); the minutes of the meetings; four op-eds from the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner; background discussion and documents produced during the task force meetings; and (for the station and university management) a CD as an attachment that includes all of the above plus the audio recording of the forum, and a compilation of letters to the editor and other documents produced by Jan Dawe, of the Listeners Alliance, for use by the task force. The report has been sent to university administrators and KUAC.

home
archives
Deirdre A. Helfferich