[Peace-discuss] Witnessing the September 20, 2004 UPTV commission meeting

[Phil Stinard]

Hello,

Randall asked for people to be witnesses to today's UPTV meeting, so here is 
my testimony on what I saw:

Today, I attended a UPTV commission meeting for the first time.  I was 
interested in both the Democracy Now and the VEYA video issues.  At today's 
meeting, Tod Satterthwaite presented new objections to the airing of 
Democracy Now (and other live programs) on UPTV.  He cited "Section 3.7," 
which requires a 20 second slate that includeds the program name, episode 
number and name, producer's name and the total running time of the video; 
and "Section 3.10," which requires a "wrap-around" and lists information to 
be included in it.  He did not state how airing Democracy Now would be 
incompatible with these rules.  He also said, "More significantly, there is 
a requirement that the producer be familiar with the program so that it does 
not contain any prohibited material.  These requirememnts cannot be met with 
programming that is being boradcast live.  Other conflicts may also exist."  
Satterthwaite did not explain how the producers of Democracy Now could be 
unfamiliar with their own programming to the point that it would contain 
"prohibited material," nor did he explain the definition of "prohibited 
material."  Apparently, the hundreds of outlets that broadcast Democracy Now 
nationwide have lower standards for "prohibited material" than UPTV.

Barb Gladney, the chair of the meeting, seemed uncomfortable and confused 
with the issues discussed.    She displayed sarcasm when she thanked the 
public for their input.  When it came time to discuss a UPTV hearing for the 
Marftell Miller case, rules were improvised on the spot during the last five 
minutes of the meeting, and the commission railroaded two separate hearing 
requests on the issue into one.  The hearing was postponed until the last 
possible date before the deadline suggested by the hearing proponents.  Ten 
separate hearing requests were made for the Democracy Now issue, and the 
commission failed to discuss setting dates for those, despite the fact that 
specific deadlines were requested.  Gladney confused the Martell Miller and 
Democracy Now cases repeatedly.

When setting dates for hearings and subcommittee meetings, the commission 
members made it clear that commission business was not a priority when 
compared with their busy schedules and day jobs.  They did not seem to 
realize that dozens of members of the public had taken time out of their own 
busy schedules to show up at this commission meeting.

When discussing the Martell Miller case, city attorney Steve Holz noted that 
he had weighed the possibility of a First Amendment suit being brought 
against the city for NOT showing the video against the possibility that John 
Piland might sue UPTV coordinator Chris Foster for eavesdropping if UPTV 
DOES show the video, and decided that the the possibility of the former was 
miniscule and unimportant.  He said that he had written Piland and asked him 
whether a case would be brought against Foster if UPTV aired the video and 
said that he had heard no reply back.  He shrugged his shoulders and washed 
his hands of the issue, saying that if Piland said it was okay, he'd show 
the video, but Piland didn't anwer his letter, so what can he do?  The 
obvious answer was call him up on the phone, but Holz seemed uninterested in 
doing that.  Someone should ask for a copy of the letter than Holz sent to 
Piland just to see if it was true that he wrote him.

On Democracy Now, a meeting is set for for this Friday, I believe, between a 
subcommittee of the UPTV commission and representatives of the mayor's 
office to iron out the differences noted above on airing live programs.  
That meeting will not be public, and the results of that meeting may not be 
available until the next UPTV commission meeting.  Apparently, the setting 
of hearing dates for the Democracy Now objections will not be done until the 
next UPTV commission meeting at the earliest, and of course they will put 
off the hearings as long as possible, ruling out possible dates on their 
busy busy calendars.   I hope that the people requesting hearings ask for 
them on separate dates so they are not lumped together.  Arguments should be 
made that each request is independent of the others.  I was saddened that 
the Martell Miller hearings were lumped together.

--Phil Stinard