[Imc-radio] Re: Response to Interview

[Clint Popetz]

On Tue, Mar 25, 2003 at 12:14:10AM -0600, Al Kagan wrote:
 
> I imagine you have all heard about the controversy about the 
> anti-Semitism segment that aired on the IMC radio program tonight. 

Probably not; it has not been discussed as of yet in a meeting or on
the lists.

> When I was asked to be interviewed for the anti-Semitism piece, I 
> naturally assumed that there would be a progressive interviewer and 
> that there would be an easy camaraderie and style in doing it.  

A natural assumption given the demographic of people at the IMC, but
an assumption nonetheless.  And for what it's worth, I feel that
Ondine is pretty progressive in her views, but that of course depends
on your definition of progressive.

> To my and David's great surprise, Ondine Gross did not follow Amy's 
> method.  She refused to tell us the questions before we started. 

Handing out questions before an interview is one approach to
interviewing, but there are many others.  I did not feel that Ondine's
approach was out of line, and I have conducted interviews similar to
hers in the past.  

> Ondine's first words made it clear that we were not going to agree on 
> the topic at hand. Clint was doing the engineering, and he made it 
> clear to us that he never said that we would be likeminded in his 
> initial message asking us to do the interview.  So we started out 
> with a great deal of tension, or let me say anger.  At that point I 
> almost walked out but I decided not to leave David there alone in the 
> lurch.  Whether or not this is justified, I felt that I had been 
> mislead, and I didn't appreciate it.

Mislead by who?  In what way? 

> After the disagreement became clear I said that my main point was 
> going to be that criticizing Israel was not the same as 
> anti-Semitism. It seems that Ondine refused to hear that. 

No, it's just that this was not the focus of her piece.

> In my opinion, the point of the segment should have been to address
> the context of the anti-Semitism discussion. 

And here we come to the crux of the matter.  It wasn't your interview,
and it wasn't your piece.  The entire point of IMC Radio News is to
empower individuals to create the news that states their views.  You
are just as free to produce a piece for the show as Ondine, and I will
be happy to assist you.  But I will not criticize or admonish Ondine
for doing exactly what I'm paid to help her do.

> The interview went well over an hour, and I think David talked for 
> more than half the time about the history of Israel and Palestine and 
> the policies of the various governments.  None of this got on the 
> air.  

She had 15 minutes of air time.  Her focus, from the very beginning,
was to explore how feelings of anti-semitism arise, triggers for these
feelings, how they lead to a feeling of exclusion from the anti-war
movement, and ways to address these problems.  Her focus was _not_
Israel/Palestine.  Your interview was one of two she did, and in fact
was not the primary interview.  She added the interview with you to
provide balance to her interview with Alan, and I think she did a good
job of that.

> Ondine was not able to understand the critical need for this
> background information and the necessity of laying out the context
> of the discussion.

I think that's an unfair accusation.  She just didn't do it the way
you wanted her to do it.

 
> The second point is more serious.  Ondine reads off a number of 
> clearly anti-Semitic slogans found at anti-war demonstrations and 
> then says that she wanted David and me to say that they had no place 
> in the peace movement.  If she would have clearly asked us that 
> question, we would have agreed with her.  I think this is a cheap 
> shot.  Perhaps it was the adversarial nature of the interview that 
> got in the way of asking clear questions and understanding the nature 
> of the answers.  Instead of asking short clear questions, Ondine read 
> long statements with all sorts of aspects that could have been 
> addressed.  David and I found that technique untenable.  After one 
> such long statement, I remember David and I looking at each other in 
> frustration and then David saying that it was difficult to know where 
> to start. 

I'm going to give you _my_ take on this.  A jewish woman who clearly
states that she feels anti-semitism exists, that it effects her
personally, and that she wants to understand it, asks you about
anti-semtism in the anti-war movement, and you both tell her
unequivocally that it doesn't exist.  _THAT_ is untenable.  How would
you feel?  If someone tells me "I feel threatened" I don't tell them
that there is no threat.  That's disempowering.


> So from my point of view, there was plenty wrong with this interview. 
> Maybe you can discuss groundrules for future projects.  I would hope 
> you would try to emulate Amy Goodman's approach. 

(a) There is nothing _wrong_ about any interview, and anyone can
choose to end their participation in an interview, or to request that
the interview not be used.  

(b) There are no ground-rules except common sense, respect, and
decency, which I felt Ondine exhibited.

(c) Amy Goodman is not a demi-goddess.  In fact, I find her
interviewing style in live situations to be unbalanced and agressive.
The whole point of independent media is that there is not _one_ way to
produce media.

> Furthermore, I hope that you will pick interviewers who better
> understand the context of the issues being discussed, from a
> point-of-view from within the progressive movement.  

Absolutely not.  IMC Radio News does not mean "progressive radio news."

> The reason that Ondine and Alan Potash are 
> uncomfortable with the anti-war movement and can't find a place 
> within it is because they don't understand the fundamental criticism 
> of US policy towards Israel and Israel's policy towards the 
> Palestinians.  

Do you recognize how arrogant that sounds?  That you understand things
and they don't, and that's why you disagree?  

> David and I agree that we need another IMC radio program on these 
> more fundamental issues around US policy towards the Middle East and 
> Israel's role in the repression of Palestinian life.  We hope you 
> will agree to do one.

I will assist anyone in producing radio.  Volunteers welcome.  I
don't choose subject matter.  The reporters do.

			-Clint