Hey, did you hear?
Now safely ensconced in Washington, U.S. Sen. Al Franken just signed a two-year deal (with a two-year option) for an hour-long weekly KSTP-AM show. As an elected official, he won’t get paid, but will have an unfiltered platform to speak directly to the public about the issues of the day. Press secretary Jess McIntosh will produce the show and screen guests and calls; wife Franni will appear frequently.
If Sen. Franken veers into partisan attacks, Republicans can just suck it; KSTP doesn’t plan on providing unfiltered time to respond.
How you feel about this prospect — and yes, I made it up; it’s complete fiction! — should govern your view about WCCO-AM and Gov. Pawlenty’s Friday “Good Morning Minnesota” show. Wednesday, Sen. Majority Leader Larry Pogemiller sent the station a letter complaining about the governor’s “unfettered, unanswered access to the public’s airwaves,” especially after a June 19 show in which Pawlenty blistered Pogemiller’s DFL for a plan to “massively raise taxes.”
Pogey’s letter concluded, “In the interest of fairness and more fully informing your listening public, we are requesting your station provide a periodic segment following the Governor’s show for lawmakers of the opposing part to provide a different point of view. A publicly licensed station such as yours should be interested in ending the ongoing monologue and embrace a dialogue of the ideas and issues facing our state.”
Aiming at the station
I’ve always felt the governor’s radio hour was a weird deal, in that any station would flip the keys to any public official and stand back. Since I usually vote DFL, and the DFL hasn’t had a governor since 1991, I concocted the Franken example to check my biases (and perhaps yours).
Reached at his summer place up north, Pogemiller allowed that WCCO isn’t entirely at fault. After legislative DFLers griped about Pawlenty’s show a few years back, the station asked lawmakers to put it in writing. They never did; Pogemiller says his letter officially puts the ball in WCCO’s court.
For the moment, station officials remain firmly in the bunker, spurning media calls.
While the DFLer alleges Pawlenty’s show has “gotten progressively more partisan and aimed” at serving presidential ambitions, the majority leader’s programming beef is with WCCO, not the governor.
Pogemiller insists he isn’t looking to knock the governor’s show off the airwaves, and isn’t looking for airtime himself. “But if he takes off on Linda Berglin on health care, Sen. Berglin should get a chance to respond,” he notes.
Ducking the question
Despite the Pogey-‘CCO beef, Pawlenty’s office put out a disingenuous response late Wednesday, noting in part:
“Numerous Democrats and non-Republicans have been guests on ‘Good Morning Minnesota,’ including Senator Amy Klobuchar, Governor Janet Napolitano, Governor Ed Rendell, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, E.J. Dionne, David Gergen, and many others, and to suggest only Republican viewpoints are represented on the show is factually incorrect.”
Of course, Pogemiller’s letter never alleged that. It specifically states, “Occasionally affording some airtime to someone from the opposing party is not sufficient to counterbalance the governor’s partisan messages and ongoing cultivation of his public persona.”
Also: notice any names missing from the governor’s list? There are no DFL legislators — the people Pawlenty most pointedly criticizes.
The Ventura effect
Aside from the “massive tax increase” crack, Pogemiller could not identify other Pawlenty partisan outrages, though he notes the governor’s “lack of respect for the legislature is beyond the pale.”
Says Pogey, “I understand this all started under Jesse Ventura. He was pretty entertaining, and WCCO thought it was a good way to do public service and entertainment. But the governor gets them the time as an officer of the state, not a personal office. If he starts to use as personal forum rather than purveying personal activity, some questions arise.”
David Ruth is the Ventura aide who created the original show. Now the associate director for national media relations at Houston’s Rice University, Ruth is uniquely qualified to analyze the situation, since he later became a DFL communications official.
“I think it’s fair for [Pogemiller] to complain,” Ruth says. “WCCO used to offer time to the opposing party; when that ended, I don’t remember. There’s no equal time provision anymore, but absolutely, the opposing side should get some time, in some fashion.
“Frankly, though, the governor probably doesn’t care. I know [Ventura] didn’t care if the legislature got equal time. The total benefit is being able to talk to the people directly, without the media filter” — and beyond that, it doesn’t matter what anyone else says, on the same station, or elsewhere.
Ruth says Pawlenty, like Ventura, is “good at doing radio” — a skill in short supply among legislative DFLers, at least the ones I’ve heard. Pawlenty is a hot enough property that several stations sought to host the show when the contract came up for bid in 2006 — though as Ruth notes, free talent is another draw.
No fairness, nor equal time
Ruth also observes that we don’t mandate equal time on other over-the-air media — Norm Coleman didn’t show up regularly on David Letterman, for example. Then again, Franken’s segments weren’t done under contract with the state.
That deal — which was renewed in 2009 through the end of Pawlenty’s term in January 2011 — designates Pawlenty communications director Brian McClung as the state official given “sole control over the content of the Governor’s Radio Show and the identity or use of guests on the show.”
The contract also gives McClung the right to designate guest hosts. (It would be interesting if in Pawlenty’s absence the power defaulted to the legislature). The deal also obligates WCCO to air 35 live and pre-recorded promotional spots each week.
While the Fairness Doctrine mandating balanced coverage was repealed decades ago, there is one circumstance in which equal time still rules: Section 315 of the federal elections code.
That provision mandates balance, once someone is formally running for office. Section 315 forced Jesse Ventura off the air before his 1998 gubernatorial bid, when KFAN didn’t want to provide a three-hour bloc to other parties. Pawlenty also went on hiatus in 2006, when the governor was replaced by DFL mayors R.T. Rybak and Chris Coleman.
Of course, Pawlenty isn’t running for anything right now — at least not formally. Pogemiller insists national Democratic Party officials didn’t spur his letter as a way to slow Pawlenty’s presidential hopes. In fact, he says the letter was prompted by 10 angry constituent calls recently, not anger among his St. Paul colleagues.
Whether you buy that or not, if letting politicians speak directly to the people is in the public interest, WCCO should carve out time after “Good Morning Minnesota,” and let a broader range of official views be heard.
I called WCCO and demanded equal time for DFL
leaders during the session. The fact that T-Paw
gave a response to Obama’s weekly address made no
difference. Corporate bias, not liberal bias is
the name of the game at the “Good Neighbor”.
I’ve noticed a number of posters concluding that they wouldn’t have a problem with a bunch of politicians having radio or tv programs. I have two problems with this approach.
First, it would expand and contribute to already out of control stenographic mode of journalism that has gripped the media in this country. For a variety of reasons many “news” outlets have fallen into either collecting quotes, or simply giving a microphone to someone so they can deliver their own quote/soundbite for broadcast. Instead of investigating and reporting results, journalism at many outlets has become a matter of finding two (at least two, for balance you know) people who will comment on something. This media style has severely damaged the accuracy and reliability of news coverage often diluting information with superfluous soundbites like the shocked neighbor who never thought anything like this would happen around here. As a general rule anything that encourages the media to abdicate it’s public responsibilities ought to be avoided.
Another problem is that as journalism slipped into this steno-mode, they failed to develop any reliable vetting process. The result was a proliferation of “institutes” and “Centers of the study of something or another” who sprung up to provide the talking heads that now populate the media. None of these sources produce peer reviewed, independent, reliable information. Worse is the reliance on political activists or politicians themselves who are notorious for manufacturing and promoting misinformation. There’s an article in the New York Times today about scientific illiteracy in the US. The real story is the role that the media has played in this illiteracy not by neglect, simply failing to cover science, but by actively promoting confusion. Ignorance in this country about everything from evolution to climate change is not the result of journalistic neglect, it’s the product of a deliberate campaign to obscure and misinform. Conservatives have been the primary culprits thus far, obscuring the true nature of scientific knowledge and consensus for political reasons; but how do these folks get on the air? WCCO gives them a show that’s how they get on the air.
Giving people like Pawlenty or any politician a free microphone has actually harmed our ability to make good public policy because they use that platform to obscure and misinform. Multiplying the number of programs would only multiply the confusion and dumb down public discourse unless you had some equal time requirements. Equal time forces broadcasters to allow free air time for rebuttal, and since they don’t get paid for that time, they have a vested in interest provided reliable and accurate content to begin with. Clearly the theory that if you hand a microphone to enough people the truth will win out- has failed.
Cry, Cry, Cry. Maybe we should just ban competition in general so everyone can be equal. When did we become such a group of cry baby losers. I think the DFL wants everyone to function like a soccer game. It lasts for ever, ultra boring, ends in a tie, and you get a pat on the butt for your great effort even thou you did nothing.
I’m telling ya, it’s way past time to re-implement the equal time rule.
Let’s be fair here; having a show on WCCO radio is the next best thing to not having a show at all.
Nice going, Senator. You just alerted thousands of previously unknowing people that such a show exists.
If this is so much in the public interest, why don’t Pogemiller and his colleagues produce a show and offer it up to stations? If there is valid public interest, the show will get broadcast.
Funny how Sen. Pogemiller doesn’t complain about the endless hours of programming on public radio that does happen to support and promote his liberal agenda.
Joe – apparently Pawlenty was quite the “soccer dad” nine years ago … see my next piece.
Spencer – I suspect everyone who wants to listen to the guv’s show probably does by now. So Pogey’s blast probably doesn’t come at a strategic cost, and may result in a net gain if WCCO carves out some new space. A good back-and-forth may raise listenership for all!
There isn’t much point in getting a radio station gig until the DFL settles on a message they want to communicate. They didn’t last session, and that’s a big part of why they came to grief.
Pogemiller’s focus on form rather than substance is typical of the ineptitude of DFL leadership.
I think the fact that Governors have had radio shows in the past changes things a bit and is worth mentioning. If Ventura had a show, and maybe even Carlson before him, then it’s more just a show the Governor does because he is Governor, regardless of party lines. When someone wins an election for governor, one of the perks just happens to be a radio show. If the people want to hear a certain viewpoint, they can vote accordingly. Add in the fact that they are forced off during election years, and it makes the show much less of a soapbox and just a way for the governor can talk with the public, like a fireside chat or TV address or anything else.
While I did blanch a bit at the Franken example, if Coleman, Kloubouchar, Dayton, Wellstone, etc. had all had shows, then it wouldn’t have been any big deal.
Spencer, the difference here is “unfiltered.” Minnesota Public Radio reporters are some of the best journalists in the state. And hosts like Gary Eichten, for instance, don’t let people off the hook when they avoid answering questions. In contrast, WCCO looks like a radio station serving a 3,000-population small town filling the time with one hour of whatever Pawlenty wants to talk about.
Pawlenty’s real political skill is the ability to call someone a jerk with a smile on his face and a lilt in his voice. He is down-right nasty, but never comes across that way. So he’s doing his hour-long shtick and making up his own facts, calling his opponents names and WCCO just lets him do it.
Frankly this show is one of the reasons that Pawlenty enjoys a high approval rating when people HATE his policies.
Goodness, Joe. Your lack of understanding of the great game of soccer is matched by your lack of understanding of basic fairness and respect for the opinions of others.
Recently, the STrib ran an article about Pawlenty’s show. It was a soggy partisan piece, basically regurgitating what Pawlenty said about Michael Jackson getting to much of the limelight. Oh, and it is time to move on after Franken’s victory, as well.
http://www.startribune.com/politics/49873562.html
I question the newsworthiness of repeating what was already broadcast. I guess one calls that an echo chamber.
Joe and Spencer this is not an example of liberal media bias, please make a note of it.
Hiram’s spot on analysis of the situation aside, I’d like to say that Pogey’s whiney little tear-stained letter is an excellent example of why I LOVE any opportunity for “face to face” time with liberals…they’re almost always wrong, almost always completely unprepared to provide a coherent explanation of the rationality behind their positions when challenged.
Case in point: The DFL’s plan to massively raise taxes is a “crack”? Maybe in the oxygen depleted atmosphere of the Paul and Shiela Wellstone Community center, but out here in the fresh air a billion dollars is still considered pretty damn massive.
I’m all for giving leftists as much air time as they’d like…just so long as the public has the unfettered opportunity to fleece them. The problem is that most of the time, a liberal will pull the covers over his or her head before the public has the chance to properly educate them.
For instance, I love nothing more than dropping a few well aimed facts on Mark Heaney in the middle of one of his vacuous, stream of un-consciousness rants.
In fact, after he’s hung up on me mid-word (always a given), I measure the success of the call by the number of minutes he continues to sputter and fume, trying desperately to dig himself out of the hole I’ve dug for him…five minutes? Score!
And therein lies the problem; most liberals are simply incapable of taking the heat.
KSTP has tried lefty hosts several times, and none lasted more than a year (remember the Nick Coleman show? HA!), because after a few months of having their butts handed to them, they invariably stop taking calls, and there is nothing more boring than listening to a self-satisfied leftist mumpsimus prattle on endlessly.
But Pogey want’s a shot? Count me in.
Spencer G: Public radio is MUCH less liberal than it used to be since George Bush starting appointing members of its board of directors.
And on public TV, the Frontline episode on health care, researched and written by T.R. Reid, was CHANGED to eliminate his conclusion that single-payer universal health care was the best way to solve our system’s problems (too expensive because insurers raised their profits by 428% between 2001 and 2007 by denying payment and/or coverage and while raising premiums every year; leaves close to 50 million people without care) and replaced his writing with the statement that we needed “universal insurance coverage.”
Mr. Reid took his name off the program.
You’ll also notice the eternally annoying presence of long commercials on programs like The NewsHour, where there used to be just a list of corporate contributors.
“Mr. Reid took his name off the program.”
Right, because PBS refused to compromise their journalistic standards to air blatant propaganda cloaked as an unbiased documentary.
It’s not the first time they’ve put the kibosh on a correspondent gone over the edge.
“In late in February, Reid dropped out of the project. He asked that his name not be associated with it and his on-air segments edited out.”
“In more than 20 years with Frontline, Sullivan could recall only one project that had a team member drop out. That was in 2003, on “Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?””
“We had worked with Anthony Summers on that,” Sullivan said. The British producer’s 1980 book Conspiracy had posited that Oswald was not solely responsible for President Kennedy’s assassination.”
“After the producers dug into the evidence, Sullivan said, “we drew a conclusion different from his.” Summers removed his name from the film.”
See how much fun this “give and take” can be?
Soccer is a borderline sport. It is a mix of kick the can and cross country. I’m still amazed that the USA can even compete on a global scale, as the only athletes USA soccer gets are those that are incapable of playing the big four.
I bit when you suggested than Franken was getting his own show and even though I don’t care for Al, I have no problem if he had a show.
I want to hear from the people who represent me — left or right. The election is over and now I need to work with who won. The rule preventing shows (without equal time) during election periods makes solid sense but outside of that let them talk!
Our incredible desire for constant fairness drives me nuts. People need to take the time to learn all sides of issues and make intelligent decisions.
Just so everyone knows who Tom Swift is. He doesn’t win arguments, he refuses to acknowledge anything outside of his cast in stone, antiquated opinions. He is kicked off of many blog comments sections, because of his incessant, clueless ranting, never taking a breath to listen or weigh others opinions. He is constantly on the attack. For instance, he has as a given that the media has an extremely left wing bias, but has no proof. So one of his main pillars of “reason” supports nothing, but he will not allow level headed discussion with facts, let alone numbers. He is cocksure and tries to intimidate, but is absolutely worthless as far as any realist debate is concerned.
Politicians have become “celebrities.” Shows like this only feed their over-inflated egos. If the DFL wants to produce their own show- go for it. Who’s stopping them? But I’d rather they spend more time trying to tackle the issues at hand that they have so mightily struggled with (Repuglicans as well.) Do you really have time for a radio show? If you do, that tells me you aren’t spending enough time tackling the problems our state is faced with.
I hope NO ONE listens to these shows, as the biased slant that either side of the political aisle would present would hardly be factual or useful. Didn’t they used to have a game show called the “Blame Game?” Put both sides on and let them duke it out.
Shorter Koskie: “I got nothin'”
You really need to get yourself a radio gig, Dave! Hehe..
@#18. Great explanation and assessment, Paul, thanks. You’ve put together an effective argument for the reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine. As you point out, and as many posters here forget, is that the issue here is about *distortion* of the facts, not simply partisan viewpoints. Misleading comments, to which T-Paw is often inclined, serve only to confuse matters and do nothing to inform. Sure, as someone pointed out, we all need to seek out differing viewpoints to fully understand an issue, but how many have the time. Besides, distorting the other side in the name of truth telling is, to say the least, unethical and we should allow for appropriate responses to clarify.
I think the question you’re all asking is best answered with a consideration of “what would a wise latina do”, don’t you think?
It’s apparently all the rage.
Thomas Swift, I have your back.