<html><body>
<DIV>Well, what is the solution? Do we leave Pacifica in the hands of the 'experts' - in other words have Board of Directors elect the Executive Director who in turn appoints the Board of Directors? That was how Pacifica got into the crisis of the 1990s in the first place. </DIV>
<DIV> Logically, it only makes sense that an institution with the pretensions that Pacifica has function differently than your typical corporation or NGO. If the traditions of progressive/radical politics of the last 200 years mean anything, they mean there should be some level of democracy. While there are all kinds of difficulties with putting it into practice, is not a democratic process preferable to giving programmers life time tenure to their time slots or to simply deeding the stations over to professional managers? {although the latter would certainly be preferable to management by assault]</DIV>
<DIV> No doubt the system of governence needs to be fixed - while I can't comment on WBAI, the difficulties at KPFA seem to reflect not so much a problem of too much democracy or democracy run amok, but a problem of too much entrenchment and an unwillingness on the part of those entrenched to adjust to changes. Managers, of course, come and go, but perish the thought of altering the time slot of the morning show. SR</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">-------------- Original message -------------- <BR><BR>. <BR>> <BR>> There are a lot of complicated issues here. How do you define the <BR>> listenership? Are there residency requirements? The kind of <BR>> programming the station features will, to a large extent, determine <BR>> the listenership. What if that programming is so weird and marginal <BR>> that the listenership dwindles to a hardy band of weird, marginal <BR>> survivors? Are they the constituency? What if the electorate is <BR>> domianted by the oddballs who have nothing better to do with their <BR>> lives? How can that listenership, however defined, understand who the <BR>> candidates are, and what the issues are? The actual practice of <BR>> current Pacifica governance, however it sounds on paper, is pretty <BR>> screwed up. <BR>> <BR>> Doug <BR>> ___________________________________ <BR>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk </BLOCKQUOTE></body></html>