{"id":176310,"date":"2017-02-09T06:31:42","date_gmt":"2017-02-09T11:31:42","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/to-truly-serve-the-public-community-stations-must-apply-standards-for-whats-said-on-air-current\/"},"modified":"2017-02-09T06:31:42","modified_gmt":"2017-02-09T11:31:42","slug":"to-truly-serve-the-public-community-stations-must-apply-standards-for-whats-said-on-air-current","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/intentional-communities\/to-truly-serve-the-public-community-stations-must-apply-standards-for-whats-said-on-air-current\/","title":{"rendered":"To truly serve the public, community stations must apply standards for what&#8217;s said on-air &#8211; Current"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of    religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or    abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right    of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the    Government for a redress of grievances.  <\/p>\n<p>    There is an active and robust debate within community radio    about what the First Amendment allows in relation to use of the    public airwaves. One common argument is that freedom of speech    means you can say or play whatever you want on the air. This is    both legally and ethically wrong. Moreover, such a narrow    interpretation misrepresents the very purpose of the First    Amendment.  <\/p>\n<p>    The First Amendment was designed to secure the separation of    church and state, and protect the right of the citizenry to    dissent. It was not intended to be a foil for propagating    intolerance and hate in the name of expression.  <\/p>\n<p>    I learned this from my father, U.S. Federal District Judge John    Kane, who has served on the bench for nearly 40 years and is an    expert in constitutional law. In the 1990s he traveled to    Albania to help its leaders draft a constitution as their    country emerged from the brutal dictatorship of Enver Hoxha.    Under Hoxha, minor acts like listening to the Beatles or    watching TV from a neighboring country could condemn an    individual or whole family to internal exile or prison.  <\/p>\n<p>    Today my father is mortified by what he views as the    disintegration of our constitutional rights and    responsibilities in the U.S. Still, he remains committed to his    work upholding our civil liberties. Right now this includes    ensuring a fair trial for two Muslim men who are being held on    terrorism charges. He is in the trenches of upholding the dream    of a healthy democratic society.  <\/p>\n<p>    His work inspires me to stay in public media. I grew up on it.    My mother helped found a community station in my hometown. I    was interviewing students and mixing music shows by the time I    was 16. Public media helped me connect the dots by providing a    window to the world from my backyard in rural Colorado. It    exposed me to artists, ideas, and information that were not    available on the commercial spectrum or in my classroom.  <\/p>\n<p>    The connection I see between the work my father does and my    work in public media is democracys requirement that we all    value ourselves as citizens. Public media cultivates that    effort by functioning as a nexus that addresses each listener    as a citizen first, and not solely as a consumer. That core    service of public media is rooted in a deeper understanding of    the First Amendment.  <\/p>\n<p>    During my 10 years as a rural station manager, I walked a very    thin line between leading a media organization and being a    member of the community. I wrestled with potential and actual    conflicts of interest, and mended fences when people made    comments on our air that offended listeners. Radio can be a    natural convener for community-level dialogue, but as    broadcasters we have to be intentional about representing a    diversity of voices without unleashing a level of discord that    actually undermines civil discussion.  <\/p>\n<p>    As a manager I responded to angry DJs who accused me of    infringing on their free speech rights when I fulfilled my    obligation to enforce FCC regulations. Sometimes this meant    simply having hard conversations with people about rules; at    other times it meant removing them from the air.  <\/p>\n<p>    Regulations and operational standards governing public radio    stations are spelled out in Title 47 of the Code of Federal    Regulations, parts 70 through 79. They are extensive and    binding. If a station violates them, the FCC can revoke its    license. When DJs are on the air, they hold that license in    their hands in a very tangible way. If they endanger it with    their actions or words, a resource that belongs to the whole    community is endangered.  <\/p>\n<p>    When DJs choose to volunteer (or not) for a community radio    organization, they must comply with this framework. The role of    staff members, including station managers, is to provide    effective training that helps volunteers learn to harness the    incredible power of the microphone. But staff must also take    steps to prevent DJs and other volunteers from putting the    stations license at risk.  <\/p>\n<p>    Any regulatory framework should be periodically evaluated and    revised, and FCC rules are no exception. For example, Section    73.3999(a) of the CFR prohibits broadcasters from transmitting    obscene material, but the definition of obscenity is vague,    open to interpretation and often unenforceable. I think this    regulation should be revised  as do many of my colleagues     but such change cannot come from individual DJs disregarding    the existing code. It has to come from an organized advocacy    effort.  <\/p>\n<p>    Theres also an ethical dimension to consider in understanding    how the First Amendment applies to community radio. Staff and    volunteers are stewards of a shared resource; we must be    committed to a mission of serving the public interest. What we    say on the air affects the communities we serve. Standards for    how we talk on the air or debate controversial topics are    necessary. They enable us to maintain the trust of our    listeners while creating a pathway for effective collaboration    within and beyond individual communities.  <\/p>\n<p>      Kane    <\/p>\n<p>    Today listeners have a plethora of media choices other than    radio. Data suggest that they are increasingly turning to these    other options. If I had a magic wand, I would pivot stations to    focus more on elevating artistry, craft and commitment to    excellence above the notion that whatever you broadcast    represents an inalienable right to express yourself. It is not    enough to just criticize our legal and ethical framework; we    have to engage a community of practice that fosters    accountability and constructive debate. Cultivating this among    community stations is the National Federation of Community    Broadcasters primary role. I am honored to lead that effort.  <\/p>\n<p>    StoryCorps creator Dave Isay says, Listening is an act of    love. Our listeners are giving us that gift whenever they tune    into public media. Lets take it to heart, and take pride and    personal responsibility for what we offer.  <\/p>\n<p>    Sally Kane started volunteering at her hometown community    radio station, KVNF in Paonia, Colo., as a teenager. She    returned 20 years later as a DJ and board member, and later led    the station as general manager and executive director. In 2014    she joined the NFCB as executive director, bringing her    experience as a trained facilitator and nonprofit management    consultant.  <\/p>\n<p>    This commentary continues our series published in    collaboration with the Editorial Integrity Project to    explore the challenges to public media journalism in a deeply    polarized civil society. The project, funded by CPB, is an    initiative of the Station Resource Group and the Affinity Group    Coalition to develop shared principles that strengthen the    trust and integrity that communities expect of local public    media organizations.  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>Follow this link:<\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"http:\/\/current.org\/2017\/02\/to-truly-serve-the-public-community-stations-must-apply-standards-for-whats-said-on-air\/\" title=\"To truly serve the public, community stations must apply standards for what's said on-air - Current\">To truly serve the public, community stations must apply standards for what's said on-air - Current<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. There is an active and robust debate within community radio about what the First Amendment allows in relation to use of the public airwaves. One common argument is that freedom of speech means you can say or play whatever you want on the air <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/intentional-communities\/to-truly-serve-the-public-community-stations-must-apply-standards-for-whats-said-on-air-current\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[187810],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-176310","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-intentional-communities"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/176310"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=176310"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/176310\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=176310"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=176310"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=176310"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}