Status Report

1) Hoax E-mail of 5/3/05

2) Lack of Response on
Member Survey

3) Non-Participation of
AETC Board Members


Prepared for May 5, 2005
AETC Board Meeting


About Atlanta Public Radio Initiative

Status Report for May 2005
Hoax E-mail of 5/3/05

APRI was as shocked as you will be after reading the attached copy of an e-mail forwarded to us by Rodney Ho, a reporter for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. It is obviously a hoax, and we have no clue as to its true origin, but we wanted to make certain the AETC board was aware of its existence.

However, we can definitely assure you that no employee of Atlanta Public Broadcasting or any of your fellow board members had anything to do with the formation of APRI.

Furthermore, we want to reiterate that it is not now and has never been the intent of APRI to end all classical music on WABE (please see our introductory statement on the previous page). As long as there is only one public radio broadcast signal in Atlanta, we simply want a better balance of music and NPR-type discussion programming, and we feel we have been making our case for over two years in a totally above board, respectful and cooperative manner.

As far as the purpose behind the e-mail, the best guess our steering committee can come up with is that it is meant as some sort of rallying cry for the station’s classical music lovers, at least some of whom we expect might attend today’s board meeting.

If you, as a board member, has any other interpretation of the e-mail, we would very much like you to share it with us.

Lack of Response on Member Survey

When Mr. Clipper and Mr. Weatherford met with three members of the APRI steering committee last November, Mr. Clipper stated that a survey of WPBA members would be coming soon, and that APRI would be invited to participate in the scope and wording of the survey – specifically as it pertained to WABE members.

After hearing nothing for four months, APRI tried to contact Mr. Clipper. Told that he was traveling, we were transferred to Mr. Weatherford. We left him a voicemail stating the reason for the call; three days later he responded and said he knew nothing about the survey being underway, but that he would notify us when action was taken.

Again, APRI heard nothing for over a month. We left a voicemail with Mr. Clipper more than three weeks ago, and have gotten no response whatsoever.

As representatives of over 700 WABE members, APRI believes we deserve better treatment. More than any other citizen group, we have been diligent, respectful attendees of AETC board meetings; we have participated in the Community Advisory Group (CAG); we got a number of our supporters to participate in the only public CAG meeting; and as noted above, we have met with Mr. Clipper and Mr. Weatherford.

We recognize that Mr. Clipper has many responsibilities – but a five-minute phone call or an e-mail updating us on the progress of the promised member survey doesn’t seem unreasonable to us.

APRI will do whatever is requested of us to help make the survey a reality. As of today, we can only ask: What is the hold up?

Non-Participation of
AETC Board Members

At the previous board meeting, several board members spoke to a basic issue that has been troubling APRI for some time: the lack of participation by a number of their colleagues.

A board member in effect scolded his fellow members for not coming to meetings, even though there are only four a year, and they are publicized months in advance. Much more seriously, he called them to task for not even paying their minimum $35 WPBA memberships! The member wanted to see a list of all members who have not paid – and APRI would like to see that list as well.

It is unbelievable to APRI that supposed community leaders, who have agreed to serve on the AETC board, can’t even muster $35 as a show of support. We can assure you that the vast majority of APRI members give much more than that minimum, and that every member of our steering committee does.

Mr. Clipper and other board members constantly say that WPBA/WABE is a community organization, in effect managed by the Atlanta community. And yet a quorum (which was lowered because of poor attendance) is sometimes not achieved at board meetings. A speaker phone was even pressed into use at one meeting just reach a quorum.

In fact, since our formation in 2003, members of the APRI steering committee have attended more board meetings than most board members.

This is a poor state of affairs, and reflects quite badly on Atlanta’s two public broadcasting outlets. APRI would like this issue to continue to be addressed by that core of board members who do take their commitment seriously – and we certainly recognize there are several.

Atlanta deserves better than a slack, non-caring board to oversee such valuable community resources as WPBA-Channel 30 and WABE.

APRI respectfully asks committed board members to remedy the situation quickly – and to know we will be glad to do anything you ask of us to reach the goal of having a truly participatory, supportive AETC board.

Status Report

Report on 11/16/04 APRI Meeting with Mr. Clipper and Mr. Weatherford

Prepared for January 27, 2005
AETC Board Meeting

About Atlanta Public Radio Initiative

Status Report for January 2005

Report on 11/16/04 APRI Meeting with Mr. Clipper and Mr. Weatherford

APRI wants to thank both Mr. Clipper and Mr. Weatherford for meeting with three members of our steering committee last November at WABE. Mr. Clipper began by saying that his intent was to listen carefully to APRI’s programming concerns – and he and Mr. Weatherford did exactly that for nearly an hour.

First, APRI acknowledged the positive steps of hiring of more news staff and adding Sunday Morning Edition. However, we are still discouraged by the lack of real investigative local reporting; reading PR releases and news summaries from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution is not genuine reporting.

We also noted that the station didn’t carry President Bush’s first post-election news conference live; it was a weekday mid-morning, and other radio networks carried it. Once again, classical music evidently could not be interrupted even for an hour to cover a major national news event.

We stated APRI’s primary contention: that a significant majority of WABE members want more NPR discussion/news programming. We urged Mr. Clipper to put our contention to the test, via a member survey. He said that “every two years the station should do a member – and non-member survey.” Further, he promised that APRI “would be involved in the creation of the survey.” However, Mr. Clipper did not commit to a timeline, either for the creation of the survey or its implementation. APRI would very much like to get concrete dates set.

APRI also discussed the station’s existing audience research and the fact that management has been unwilling to share any of it with us. As a public radio station, it seems not only reasonable but advisable that the public know what the station’s existing and prospective listeners’ programming preferences are. Mr. Clipper acknowledged that Audiographics research “might be” available, but again, no concrete steps were discussed to share that very pertinent information with APRI.

Further, APRI believes it is only commonsense to take an in-depth look at the relationship between funds raised and programming. The vast majority of all individual contributions occur during the Fall and Spring pledge drives, and listeners are strongly encouraged by on-air fundraisers to support their favorite program by calling in during it.

It is APRI’s contention that by far the largest percentage of pledging occurs during NPR programming – and if that is the case, isn’t it logical to assume that providing more of this type of programming will increase both revenue and listenership for WABE? APRI wants to see those fundraising figures; neither Mr. Clipper nor Mr. Weatherford responded to that request.

We presented a modest, cost-free proposal in the research arena: on the WABE website, why not have a section where visitors could indicate their favorite programs? APRI would be more than happy to work with station personnel to make that happen.

APRI also expressed extreme disappointment in virtually every aspect of the Community Advisory Group (CAG), from the way its members were chosen, to the lack of meetings (both private and public), to an ill-defined reporting channel of its work. We believe there is too much bureaucracy; CAG is evidently supposed to report to the programming CAST, and it in turn does something that is not clear to us.

While recognizing the tough assignment Chuck Taylor has taken on in terms of chairing CAG, the APRI representative has felt a negative tone from Mr. Taylor and an unwillingness to discuss a number of basic programming issues. Mr. Clipper said, “I’ll make sure Chuck is more open.” We appreciate his help in this matter, because right now APRI has no confidence in CAG’s ability to effect any programming changes.

While APRI noted that no group was more excited about the prospect of dual signals for WABE, we don’t want our goals to be ignored for the at least 18-24 months before digital broadcasting might start appearing. Plus, there is the whole issue of digital radios themselves being available at reasonable prices. All of this is simply too indefinite to meet our members’ expressed desires.

Instead, APRI told Mr. Clipper and Mr. Weatherford that we intend to keep pressing forward with what we consider to be our reasonable goal: two more hours of NPR-type discussion/news programming between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m. weekdays, and another hour between 8 and 10 p.m. We are convinced a large majority of current WABE members would enthusiastically support these changes.

We again thanked Mr. Clipper and Mr. Weatherford for their time, their undivided attention and their courtesy. We said APRI wants to work in a cooperative manner with WABE management, and we mean it.

APRI needs to see concrete steps being taken to address the issues we brought up in that meeting. We represent over 700 WABE listeners, and our concerns deserve to be addressed now, not in some vague way at some indeterminate future date.

Status Report

Report on 10/27/04 Community Advisory Group Meeting

WABE Listenership Ratings Prepared for October 28, 2004 AETC Board Meeting


About Atlanta Public Radio Initiative

The second members-only meeting of the PBA Community Advisory Group (CAG), was held at the station's headquarters on Wednesday, October 27, 2004.

APRI's understanding is that CAG's purpose is to gather input from viewers, listeners, and community leaders as to the direction, including the programming mix, of public broadcasting in Atlanta. CAG is comprised of 12 people supposedly chosen to represent a broad spectrum of the Atlanta community. One of APRI's founders, Andy Altman, was asked to be a member and has attended every meeting.

Here is his report of CAG’s meeting yesterday:

Chairperson Chuck Taylor stated the goal of the meeting was to discuss recommendations that would be forwarded to the Programming CAST. These recommendations were to be based on the notes Mr. Taylor and the facilitator took of audience comments during CAG’s first public meeting, held last May. (Due to a lack of coordination on the station’s part, the meeting was not recorded.)

After Mr. Taylor’s report, CAG members quickly reached a consensus that they did not yet have adequate information to make recommendations to the programming CAST. The remarks from the May meeting were collected in a way that was simply too haphazard to support any particular recommendations.

Andy Altman argued that the kind of objective data contained in an analysis called "Strategic Audiographics" (available from Audience Research Analysis, Inc.) would be useful to WABE. The analysis predicts the impact of major programming changes on membership and underwriting revenue. According to an individual who worked for over a decade in public radio, "In most cases, especially in major markets such as Atlanta’s, the station's public service potential (as well as revenue) will be significantly enhanced by making the sort of change APRI advocates [i.e., more NPR-type programming]."

It was revealed at the meeting that WABE already receives analyses from Audience Research Analysis. However, Mr. Taylor quickly interjected that the Programming CAST – not CAG – is the place where such data will be reviewed, and that CAG would not have access to it. He explained that CAG's task is to determine, by reaching out into the various Atlanta area communities, how station programming can better serve the needs of the community. Nonetheless, even if one agrees that community outreach is a major part of CAG's task, it remains unclear why supplementing that outreach in with scientific data provided by Audience Research Analysis (and Arbitron ratings, for that matter) would be not be useful.

The reply might be that CAG need not look at the data because the Programming CAST and station management will do so. However, such a reply does not explain how it is possible for well-founded recommendations regarding programming to be made if there is no access to data the Board and station management themselves use in assessing the programming schedule. CAG's recommendations would be hobbled by the arbitrarily limited scope of information on which the group relied.

Recommendations cannot simply be a recitation of what CAG members hear from their community constituencies. What is heard must be assessed, balanced, and prioritized. Opportunity costs must be taken into account. None of this is possible under the restrictions that have been imposed on CAG.

When it was suggested that nothing but marginal changes could be expected from CAG, Mr. Taylor asserted that the group was free to make far-reaching recommendations for changes in PBA programming. In reality, CAG lacks the information that would be necessary to support all but the most marginal of changes in the current programming format.

A member of CAG expressed the view that it might be helpful to look at how much pledge money was raised during the different programs. Notwithstanding Mr. Taylor's request that she remain silent at the meeting, WABE Program Director Lois Reitzes responded that Audience Research Analysis found that people give money when they have the time to call in and not when they are listening. Such a response is implausible on several fronts.

First, it is belied by the efforts of every NPR station – WABE included – to target the listeners of shows during the pledge breaks of those very same shows, e.g., "You know how important All Things Considered is to you. Please call now with your pledge..." Second, there is no doubt that some people call in during shows to which they do not listen, but to posit that there is no correlation at all between pledge support and audience size is not even prima facie credible. Third, the Arbitron ratings provide an independent check, showing the highest pledge goals at WABE are consistently matched to the shows with the highest ratings.

Unfortunately, Mr. Taylor preemptively ruled that any discussion of pledge support during various shows was beyond the scope of CAG, and he cut the topic off after Mrs. Reitzes had made her dubious assertion.

At a subsequent point in the meeting, Andy Altman argued that any recommendations about programming, far-reaching or marginal, should surely take into account the fact that Aribtron ratings show WABE has the third highest rating among Adults 35+ during Morning Edition, and the second highest rating during All Things Considered/Marketplace. The station then falls to 12th place during the 9 a.m. – 4 p.m. time period, all but one hour of which is Second Cup, hosted by Lois Reitzes.

Another CAG member replied that in her view, such ratings were not as important as what community leaders, such as those in the arts and culture, could tell us about what their constituencies thought were important. Yet, it is surely no mystery what people devoted to arts and culture are going to say. Does the station really need community outreach to determine that those who are committed to the arts think that the arts are very important? The same CAG member also pointed to polls showing that 84% of Atlanta area respondents regarded arts and culture as very important and 75% said that they would pay higher taxes for arts and culture.

Supposing that, contrary to what every social scientist knows, such numbers can be taken at face value, it is still puzzling to figure out what sort of recommendation to the Programming CAST the numbers would support. The polls in question are not even about broadcast programming. Yet Mr. Taylor enthusiastically encouraged the CAG member to provide him with the data, having seen fit several minutes earlier to exclude discussion of evidence that was actually about WABE's own programming.

Mr. Taylor mentioned at the end of the meeting that, in setting up CAG, he had modeled it on WNYC’s approach. However, the community group at that station "deliberates independently of station management and WNYC's Board of Trustees, determining its own agenda and electing its own leadership." (source: WNYC website)

It is clear CAG at PBA enjoys no such independence, since its agenda and its access to information about the station's programming is so narrowly circumscribed by the Board and Mr. Taylor.

The tight leash on which CAG has been kept deviates in spirit and in word from what was promised when the Board first publicly announced one year ago that a community advisory group would be formed.

WABE Arbitron Ratings
APRI wants to thank AETC Board Member Ed Baker for providing us with a recent, partial TAPSCAN/Arbitron radio listenership survey conducted in metro Atlanta. As you’ll see below, Mr. Baker clearly discussed doing this with Milton Clipper before releasing the data to us.

And while we agreed not to share actual survey numbers with anyone else, we are sure Mr. Baker would not mind if we reported that APRI’s basic contention is clearly corroborated by the survey – namely, that WABE ranks amazingly high when it airs NPR news during both morning and afternoon drive times.

However, during the 9 a.m. – 4 p.m. time slot (all of which consists of Second Cup except the last hour), WABE listenership falls off dramatically.

Our assertion is that WABE reaches many more listeners – and thus better serves our community – when it airs NPR programming. The drive-time programs also include local news and traffic reports, which are community services in their own right.

Further, we feel certain the majority of individual donations to WABE come during NPR programming. That is, listeners are voting with their pocketbooks for the programs they want to hear. We have tried to get fund-raising data from station management to support this contention, but we have been unsuccessful.

In fact, Mr. Baker spoke to Mr. Clipper about this request as well, and Mr. Clipper told Mr. Baker to have APRI call him directly to discuss the matter.

APRI phoned right away, but after a month, Mr. Clipper has yet to return our call.

Status Report prepared for AETC Board Meeting.

Report on the First Public Meeting of the Community Advisory Committee.

Status Report prepared for AETC Board Meeting. This report consists of three sections:

• WABE carried Rice’s testimony before the 9/11 Commission.
• The coverage of President Bush’s press conference.
• The inaugural (closed) meeting of the Community Advisory Committee

Status Report prepared for the AETC Board Meeting. This report consists of three sections:

• Thoughts on WABE’s 2002 Competitive Issues Report.
• AJC article on WABE's decision not to air the NPR-sponsored Democratic debates.
• The status of the Community Advisory Committee.

Status Report prepared for the AETC Board Meeting. This report consists of two sections:

• Content and responses to an online survey posted on our website from 10/8 – 10/28/03. 195 participants.
• A compilation of all the comments survey participants added after taking the survey.

null