wbai.net Pacifica/WBAI history   events   links   archive   bylaws etc
PNB   LSB   elections   contact info   opinion   search

To the so-called Pacifica national board

Date sent: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 23:35:30 -0500
To: John M. Murdock jmurdock@ebglaw.com
From: Joseph Friendly friendly@pipeline.com
Subject: Pacifica Board

Dear Pacifica Board Director,

The question as posed by John Murdock is democracy. Democratic local advisory board elections, particularly in Houston and DC, if actually representative of current listener/supporters might choose the Murdock faction to lead the Pacifica National Board and continue their orientation in control of Pacifica.

Pacifica is basically a trust, with mission principles that make clear the direction of programming should be anti-Establishment, and particularly in our times it should be unmistakably anti- government as countering a complicitious commercial media hiding from the public that the US in truly an empire seeking to impose a Pax Americana rather than true peace.

That's the Pacifica Mission we ought to be able to agree upon. But do we?

When recently resigned Ken Ford was earlier deposed on oath why he decided to join the Board of Directors, his full answer was simply, "I like jazz." Later on he admitted, before resigning, to never having tuned in DemocracyNow!!

Is that not clear to all, including John Murdock as well as Robert Farrell, James Ferguson, and Bert Lee, et al. to be a prima facie case for Ken Ford's not belonging on the Pacifica board?

What case can be made why we should find acceptable 5 of such Directors on a future board, when none have the mission at heart?

For WPFW to have played only jazz on January 20, 2001, ignoring the protestors of the inauguration, is a prima facie case of the Murdock faction's being unworthy characters to be on the Pacifica Board. They had no business ever being on.

There is such a natural human hunger for the truth, that for Pacifica to straightforwardly choose that direction for programming, to forcefully embrace revealing the wrongs of our government, past and present, there would be an abundance of listener support. That's where the bucks should have been put, letting the public know of the availability of truth somewhere on the dial.

Past listeners/supporters have more priority than present ones who are attracted to programming that does not reflect the political principles of Lew Hill as a basic orientation that opposes war and corporate commercialism.

Not 5-5-5 but just 5 real activists to restore mission-based programming. That's what's called for. What's your comeback, John Murdock?

Joe Friendly


Posted by: http://savewbai.tao.ca

opinion | home