[Peace-discuss] Re: UPTV's unexpected ally?

[Stuart Levy]

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 02:15:28PM -0700, David Green wrote:
> After watching this, I was left clueless about the implications of what
> happened. It's really hard to keep focused on what these folks are saying.

The upshot seemed to be:

  - What's being passed along for consideration next week is
    an updated bundle of UPTV rules and procedures...
    which wouldn't make any drastic change.  It does sound as though
    they'd address the mismatch between UPTV application forms and
    operating requirements which Lee Melhado dramatically called
    violations of "due process".

  - The city lawyer argued on First Amendment grounds
    against pretty much all the proposed changes in how
    UPTV would accept programming.

    Even ones that seem thoroughly innocuous -- like limiting
    the number of times that any person could submit programs
    each year, or requiring that (ongoing?) programs need some
    modest number of signatures in support -- would likely fail
    if challenged in court.   The court would look at the
    current controversy and conclude that those limits had been
    set up to exclude the controversial material.

    [That may well be though I hope that some of the changes
    might end up being adopted anyway -- not to single out Brumleve's
    nasty stuff but to provide an equitable way of sharing limited air time
    on an increasingly successful UPTV channel.]
    
    I think the only proposal for which he saw no legal obstacle
    was to have the City sandwich counter-programming around
    controversial programs.

    Though Dennis Roberts was not happy with that idea -- who decides
    which programs need counter-programs and how, and why is the
    City getting into this anyway?

  - Lynn Barnes was the only one to clearly call for
    removing the P(ublic) from PEG channels (to the applause of
    the "I support free speech except..." crowd in the audience),
    and the only one to vote against passing along the
    updated UPTV procedures for consideration next week.

  - It's not clear what Robert Lewis thinks, except that he'd
    like the controversy to go away.

  - Dennis Roberts, Danielle Chynoweth and Charlie Smyth each spoke
    eloquently in favor of keeping UPTV open to the public,
    and to third-party material.

  - Danielle suggested (among many other good ideas) separating the
    P(ublic) station into its own entity -- with its own channel.
    This would make it clear that it's its own entity, not
    a City organ.

    She also pointed out the Urbana population's overwhelming support
    for a public-access channel, and even strong support for raising
    fees to maintain it, from the recent study done in preparation
    for cable provider re-negotiation.

    (I.e., don't pull the plug on P!)

  - Mayor Prussing said very little.

 Stuart