[Imc-radio] Re: [Imc] Radio group operating by consensus?

[Clint Popetz]

On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 04:44:03PM +0000, Sandra Ahten wrote:
> I propose that there be discussion regarding the radio groups compliance 
> with IMC structure guidelines at the steering committee meeting on 
> Wednesday April 16th.

I can never make Wednesday night meetings, but I am fine with this
being discussed and with whatever decisions are made, because I feel
my views are adequately represented by those already in attendance at
steering meetings.

> Also I couldn't tell him that the radio group decided on the
> protocol to decide how pieces get produced and aired by consensus...
> because I don't think there is currently a radio group that is
> meeting and forming any consensus.

Radio News meetings went on a hiatus because for 5 weeks straight I
was the only one attending, although there were and are many people
producing news.  My discussions with individual producers and
reporters led me to believe that there was not a problem with the
current model of having volunteers work one-on-one with me in lieu of
a meeting, which is also used by other groups producing shows like
FSRN.  We can start having meetings again, though they are less than
useful if I am by myself.  I will ask the radio group for dates that
would work.

> The print group does not have the same stance that I have heard
> Clint proclaim, that he will teach ANYONE radio production and it is
> ENTIRELY up to them what they produce.  That is fine... but is it
> fine that it is aired as IMC news? The print group does indeed not
> print everything that is submitted to us. The print group has to
> agree BY CONSENSUS that it fits our criteria and is useful to
> getting the voices of the under-represented served.

Until now, Al is the _only_ person who has raised this concern to me.
Given that he has never attended a radio meeting or been involved in
radio production at the IMC, I frankly didn't give much credence to
his cry for action, particularly when it was not echoed by anyone
else.  But if there are a hidden mass of people who feel like there is
a problem, there should definitely be a discussion.

The process of volunteering to produce radio news at the IMC has had a
self-selecting effect of serving the under-represented without
any intervention.  Rush ditto-heads don't need the IMC, and therefore
don't use it.  People who feel under-represented approach us because
we are the only outlet they have.  

With regards to Ondine's piece, I have received a _lot_ of positive
feedback on it, more so than any other piece since I started doing
radio news.  I have no doubt there would have been unanimous support
within the radio group to air it, and I stand by that decision.  I
challenge anyone to find a piece that expressed her view _anywhere_ in
mainstream media.  It was thoughtfully put together, was unabashedly
personal, and the fact that it upset someone brings me great joy.
News should be provocative.  News should broaden horizens.  News
should make people uncomfortable.  News should be about women telling
white male professors that they don't know it all, that a knowledge of
middle eastern politics doesn't nullify the hurt and fear one can feal
in response to hateful language, that the personal IS political.

At least, that's the type of news I took this job to produce.  

				-Clint