> * * * WBAI is in dire financial straits.
> Please help the station out . . . . etc.
This is actually quite confusing.
You've earlier also said directly or in effect, apparently quite correctly, that, to this day, that station is riven by destructive internal politicking in substantial part reflecting what, for want of a better term, might be termed "racial politics" (or, more bluntly but perhaps also more accurately, "racism") exacerbated by self-interested careerism and greed (e.g., the putative program director, at one time a self-described reformer, and other administrators buying and paying for cronies as they meanwhile pay themselves); that, for the most part (your program, Michao Kaku's show, and, now, just all too tiny number of others being notable, and commendable, exceptions), the quality of programming has degraded to less than that of a (very bad and also borderline-illiterate) high-school radio station; that individual listeners who portray themselves as station activists are themselves too often characterized by (also: at best) nuttily socially-isolated individuals without a clue about very much of anything (not to dwell on: how to improve programming and operational station management); and that, meanwhile, those in control for now of the station's operation are continuing to squander many hundreds of thousands of dollars on attorneys' and like fees/expenses themselves largely triggered by, and being used to in effect to defend, the very mismanagement that as resulted in these realities.
You've also referred to a recording of the proceedings of the Pacifica network's financial officers, who, at a recent meeting, spent much of the time discussing the "WBAI crisis" (except, at that, only in terms of cash-flow and related finances) but who in so doing barely touched on any of the specifics of what is going on at the station, much less did any of that meeting's participants even try to suggest any substantive remedies although several did refer several times to a West Coast sister station's listener-base and economic growth while at the same time, apparently intentionally, avoiding addressing implementing anything close to a meaningful remedy for WBAI (e.g., for starters, programs people want to listen to? [duh]) even though WBAI's rapidly dwindling audience is in the country's largest radio market (where, at that, the station is readily findable/accessible in the very middle of the FM radio dial!).
One perhaps ought understand and to some degree accept that the "price" expected to be paid by a producer is to do on-air fundraising and ancillary requests as in the List posting here referred to. Nevertheless, query whether your request above is more than a little misleading, at least in the absence of a (credible) accounting of how the funds solicited will be used (other than, as presently appears, for continuing to fund cronyism, which, apparently, these days includes high-fee charging "outside" professionals who, however, [at least based on what few reports have so far been provided and, perhaps more significantly, in light of what has not been said] have basically just spun wheels while submitting still more bills).
As a former long-time listener and, (in the past, sometimes substantial) contributor, I confess I don't know what is the right/practical thing to do; but one alternative that (at least for now) is arguably preferable to a "Yes" response to your request above is to refrain from contributing until, at the least, assurances of more active oversight from the network itself and of transparency by the station itself in terms of prompt accounting for sums collected and how they will be used. I doubt I would be alone in asking: What if anything is wrong with this feeling (and, at least for the time being, refusal to write a check)?