KPFT Notes

Pacifica Radio Archives Preserved Tapes Now Online

with 14 comments

14 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

1. Why does KPFT allow someone like Leo Gold to engage in essentially hate speech to its listeners? Read all the details on my blog.

   

   Clint

   23 October 2009 at 11:32 pm

   Reply
2. Hi Clint,

   I’m familiar with your post, and believe your positioning of the question, throwing out terms like ‘hate speech’ and whole dismissal of KPFT over a disagreement with Leo to be misleading. Rather than forward traffic to your site (you’ve distributed your link already), I’ve copied your letter here, which was in response to Leo’s comments to a caller promoting a conspiracy theory video during a call-in segment. I’ve also omitted the particular video name, URL and host, as these are apparently commercial enterprises I have no interest in promoting.

   Leo’s post-call remarks (in full, as I’d like others to judge for themselves the alleged hate speech you reference) were, after the initial call:

   The site that Sonny is citing is [mentions url], put out by somebody named [mentions film host] and this looks to be conspiracy theory about Obama, so either Sonny is confused or he’s slipping in kind of in a sideways fashion a plug for this site. But this basically is saying President Obama is behind martial law or something like that. I don’t know. To me, it’s just paranoia. I’m not saying things are perfect. Our government has a lot of problems, no question about it. But we can’t wallow in conspiracy theories. We’ve gotta roll our sleeves up. We’ve gotta fix things. We’ve got to organize together.

   During your call, he pointed out to you that the site the caller referenced gave instructions on surviving martial law in America, to which an argument ensued and concluded with what sounded like a challenge by you that Leo demonstrate martial law was not already in effect. His comments after your call:

   Clint wants me to prove a negative. Clint wants me to prove that martial law has been secretly declared in this country. And I’m supposed to disprove that, because he says it might have happened. And that’s his idea of production, intellectual production in this day and age when we need to solve some problems. [Leo then describes the website, which has Barack Obama in menacing poses, and military activities during a disaster.] And there are questions as to why I say there are disconnects and problems with certain people putting information together. Clint demonstrated what I’m talking about. Are there conspiracies? Yeah, there are conspiracies. Some are formal, some are kind of informal. But the attempt by someone like [film host's name] to postulate that the president of the United States is involved with a larger conspiracy to impose martial law in America, says it could have happened and wants me to disprove that to me demonstrates some of the problem we’re dealing with.

   Your subsequent letter:

   Mr. Gold:

   I called your show today 10/22/09, and I would like to echo what I said when I called, and my hope is you hear me this time instead of just hanging up the phone because you don’t agree.

   I want to express my dismay at the level of close-minded rhetoric on your show today. I think the way in which you treated the caller whom you labeled a “conspiracy theorist”, after you disconnected him I might ad, is deplorable. It is patriotic to question the official story about everything. As a matter of fact, that’s the commission the founding fathers gave us.

   This level of intolerance is similar to McCarthyism as labeling someone as a Conspiracy Theorist is the same as labeling someone a Communist in the 1950s. It’s a phrase one can say to instantly discredit someone without the burden of having to evaluate the level of truth in their words.

   As a journalist, you have a mandate to question the official story. This level of intolerance is an outrage to a radio station that claims to stand for peace or at the very least open-minded dialog where callers will be treated with respect and basic human dignity. Instead, you said the following, (paraphrased): “Don’t be fooled this man is a sneek, What he said was wrong, he’s crazy, danger! DANGER! Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!”

   Without even giving the caller the respect to respond to your slander, you cowardly make a blanket statement to your listeners discrediting him after you disconnect him. You say the man is a sneak, a conspiracy theorist and everything he said was paranoid, insane and even dangerous.

   Even if you don’t agree with him, you might seek a better way to disagree with your callers that falls in line with the principles of human dignity.

   My personal opinion is that you are abusing the gift of the airtime you have been given for your show. Airtime that I help pay for – it isn’t yours to do with what you will.

   Therefore, because of this outrage, I will not support KPFT as a listener or as a donor this year. I will invest my time and money I have previously allotted for “peace” to some place that knows a little bit better about what peace really is.

   Within your letter, there are two primary issues:

   1.) the handling of a call

   2.) what was said about a caller

   Indirectly, there is also some opinion about what should be put on the air.

   In regard to the handling of a call, hosts are given a great deal of latitude to determine the pacing, applicability, etc. of calls in the interests of keeping a show engaging and listeners tuned in. If a caller goes off topic or takes the program somewhere the host doesn’t intend the program to go, our policy permits a host to drop the call and move on. Our job is to bring in listeners and facilitate conversations, and calls that detract from that in a host’s view are understood to be handled with the best intentions. I screened the program and didn’t believe there to be malicious intent. The reality was the show was almost out of time, and the topic (the existence of martial law) was significant enough of a derivation from the dominant topics of that week’s program to require redirection by the host.

   In regard to what was said of a caller, we are compelled to err on the side of courtesy with callers, listeners, etc., even ones that are disagreeable. We do not want to be seen by other listeners as instigating conflicts. Even when dropping a call, I expect hosts to be courteous and not use their power to belittle anyone. I concur this is a learning process. In the case of the calls in question, the host focused on disagreements he had with the ideas, which is appropriate. Other remarks that could be construed as personal attacks, certainly, should be avoided.

   Indirectly, there is an opinion put forward that we have a journalistic mandate to question official stories. While this is accurate, the same mandate requires we look critically at (and understand when something lacks credibility) positions that may have little merit or may damage our overarching efforts.

   Thanks for your comment. I hope my reply was helpful.

   

   Ernesto Aguilar

   24 October 2009 at 12:44 am

   Reply
3. Why don’t you replay the show or make it available online; without any creative editing on your part?

   

   Clint

   24 October 2009 at 1:29 am

   Reply
4. Um…. you’re new here, aren’t you?

   KPFT maintains an online archive of its programming, free of globalist creative editing, for anyone to download, podcast and hear again. I encourage everyone to listen to New Capital, subscribe to the show via podcast and verify my notes. The first call on the 22 October program is about 45 minutes into the show, your call is at 53 minutes and ends around 55 (the program is scheduled to end at 58 minutes).

   http://archive.kpft.org/

   [Apologies if any of the tongue-in-cheek comments offend anyone. I'm kidding, though I did spend a chunk of time transcribing for everyone to read, and the implication I've fabricated the exchanges is false. Please do check it out.]

   

   Ernesto Aguilar

   24 October 2009 at 8:28 am

   Reply
5. Thanks Ernesto. However, I’m curious why you omitted so much of what Leo said here. Only very little is here, and it reads like it’s been edited. One of the key points missing here is that the topic of Martial Law was brought up by who..? KPFT’s very own Mr. Leo Gold. I was merely responding to his question. I called to ask him why a radio station that says it stands for peace and open-minded dialog would treat a caller with such disrespect.

   Thanks also for the information, usually most of the links are dead on the KPFT website and Leo only has a few up on his website. I’m curious, do you work for KPFT or are you a volunteer? Either way if you signed up to represent KPFT, please don’t complain about having to do your job. The “chunk” of time you mentioned, you were paid for that, yes..? If you find the work too laborious, perhaps you should take Leo’s advice to stop complaining and do something.

   I’m asking everyone who was offended by Leo’s comments to take a stand and boycott the pledge drive next week. And how will you know you’re losing potential money? We will let you know…don’t worry.

   

   Clint

   24 October 2009 at 9:01 pm

   Reply
6. Hi Clint… replies:

   Thanks Ernesto. However, I’m curious why you omitted so much of what Leo said here. Only very little is here, and it reads like it’s been edited.
   

   You’re welcome. I left out ‘ums" and restated sentences, but the comments after the calls are there. Others are welcome to verify through listening from the archive.

   One of the key points missing here is that the topic of Martial Law was brought up by who..? KPFT’s very own Mr. Leo Gold. I was merely responding to his question.

   This statement is untrue. Leo said (around 54 minutes in) that a banner on the site in question referred to surviving martial law, at which point you began to argue with him about said topic. He did as a question, in response to your comment, at 54:35 ask whether the film in question refers to martial law you allege following Hurricane Ike (another question, around 54:20, was rhetorical and sounded sarcastic, "how ya doin’ now? Still under martial law?"). However, the argument was not prompted by Leo, nor was the subject — he mentioned a banner he saw on the site, and you chose to debate the topic with him. I encourage others to listen to the program.

   I called to ask him why a radio station that says it stands for peace and open-minded dialog would treat a caller with such disrespect.

   Also untrue. You came on the air around 53:30 and criticized Leo for use of the term conspiracy theorist. No mention of the station, treatment of the caller, peace, et al. was offered. Your recent declaration (below) drops the pretense of peace, etc. you offered in your original letter and here.

   I’m curious, do you work for KPFT or are you a volunteer?

   I am program director and work for KPFT.

   Either way if you signed up to represent KPFT, please don’t complain about having to do your job.

   I do not mind supporting KPFT. I do mind seeing distortions and have thus corrected the record.

   The "chunk" of time you mentioned, you were paid for that, yes..?

   Actually, no, I’m not paid for the time mentioned. I am paid for a 40-hour-week, and not the time I devote to endeavors like this in support of KPFT.

   If you find the work too laborious, perhaps you should take Leo’s advice to stop complaining and do something.

   My ‘complaint’ wasn’t about devoting some of my time to transcribing the program discussion for listeners. My complaint has to do with your implication I fabricated what was presented ("creative editing"). Your allegation is false. In that respect, I did do something — I pointed out your statement was false and demonstrated it by providing a transcript and link to the audio that others could verify.

   I’m asking everyone who was offended by Leo’s comments to take a stand and boycott the pledge drive next week. And how will you know you’re losing potential money? We will let you know…don’t worry.

   I wasn’t worried, but thanks for the concern. I’m aware you’ve posted the following and asked for people to call our pledge lines and say they are boycotting. This is a tactic Pacifica stations are familiar with.

   To all the 9/11 Truthers, Patriots, Conspiracy Theorist, and so called “Nut Jobs” — I would like to suggest a course of action. Stop being treated like a second class citizen.

   The answer here is simple. If you were outraged by Leo Gold’s comments, if you are tired of these one trick pony liberals with a lot nerve and a little bit of education labeling you as crazy because you know the truth, then I ask you to take a stand. I’m asking you, the conspiracy theorist, nut jobs who aren’t afraid to admit it, I want you to put your money where your mouth is and boycott the KPFT fund-raiser planned for next week.

   As truthers, it’s time for us to ascend to the level of respect and dignity true patriots deserve. These people have no intention of treating you with respect unless they have to. Let’s make them. It’s bad enough we as the truth movement endure petty ridicule from the likes of Geraldo or the ghouls on Fox and friends, but do we really have to take it from whiner like Leo Gold and his little two hour a week rant of superiority [edit: New Capital is an hour-long program]? Now is the time to put and end to the sarcasm and heckling by a halfway house for so-called intellectual elitist and second-rate journalists.

   If you reward institutions like Pacifica who ridicule you and therefore conceal the real truth, if you give them your ears, your time and God forbid, your money, then you are of the same disorganized thinking of a battered house wife. Her husband beats her, screams at her and deprives her, yet she’s the first one to come to his defense when he’s in hand cuffs. Cast off this slave mentality. Walk tall, and claim your birthright as a citizen of the United States.

   The answer here is simple. Don’t give money to KPFT next week. If you planned to make a donation, don’t. Instead support the institutions of truth where you are fed intellectually, like your local 9/11 truth movement, Ron Paul, Alex Jones David Eik. Support those people who drape banners over the freeway bridges saying 9/11 was an inside job. Support your local pastors, teachers or business men who have bravely taken a stand and have been held up to ridicule by two bit puppets and pin heads like Leo Gold.
   NEXT WEEK, SAY NO CASH FOR PACIFICA! NO MORE MONEY FOR KPFT!
   CALL KPFT AT 713-526-5738

   While there are so many issues I want to address here — from not knowing how long New Capital is to a rather problematic spin on violence against women — I believe this statement speaks for itself in terms of moving beyond the reported reasons for the complaint. No longer is this about treatment of a caller or standing for peace, but attacking KPFT for failing to adhere to a particular view to which some expect it to adhere.

   Leo has expressed to you interest in discussing this issue on air. While I know you’ve written of Leo being ‘backed into a corner’ by your posting, I tend to agree with him that your efforts and feedback are of value. Thank you.

   

   Ernesto Aguilar

   24 October 2009 at 9:42 pm

   Reply
   • I’d be happy to make an appointment to come to the station and discuss this with Leo, yourself and anyone else face to face and on the air. Please let me know what time you would like me to be there.

     

     Clint

     24 October 2009 at 9:51 pm

     Reply
     • Hi again Clint.

       It might have been more appropriate to ask for such a meeting before attacking the program host for "cowardly and arrogant" reactions and alleging his reaching out to you directly was motivated by pledge drive, as well as posting widely to many sites that people boycott our pledge drive, tie up our lines and harass our phone volunteers with calls.

       Also, I understood from this piece you recently wrote to Leo that you wanted these interactions to be held in a public forum. Specifically:

       Please, from now on, don’t try to contact me directly with some back room apologies. At the very least, show the same boldness you did when you slandered the character of your caller. Make your statements in public, because we all want to hear what you have to say…

       You may wish to contact Leo to see if he’d like to meet with you. Best of luck, and feel free to post my transcription and time references for your call, rather than a single out-of-context statement, in the future.

       

       Ernesto Aguilar

       24 October 2009 at 10:56 pm
7. I’ve only brought attention to a larger issue here Ernesto. Let’s not forget so many issues have started because of one thing and then moved to larger issues. The whole of the civil rights movement wasn’t about Rosa Parks having to give up her seat on the bus, however, it was the spark that lit a fire exposing a great many other injustices and larger issues.

   

   Clint

   24 October 2009 at 10:42 pm

   Reply
   • Wow. Likening oneself to the oppression people of African descent faced. No words. Thanks Clint.

     

     Ernesto Aguilar

     24 October 2009 at 11:02 pm

     Reply
8. So first you say this:

   “Leo has expressed to you interest in discussing this issue on air. While I know you’ve written of Leo being ‘backed into a corner’ by your posting, I tend to agree with him that your efforts and feedback are of value. Thank you.”

   …and now you say:

   “It might have been more appropriate to ask for such a meeting before attacking the program host for “cowardly and arrogant” reactions and alleging his reaching out to you directly was motivated by pledge drive, as well as posting widely to many sites that people boycott our pledge drive, tie up our lines and harass our phone volunteers with calls.”

   I’m confused, I never asked for a meeting, but if you did want to meet I offered that I would be happy to do so in a public arena, but not where Leo can disconnect me and then trash me to his audience.

   So first you say there is value in my comments and then you say I ruined my chances because I didn’t play nice with you..? Really Ernesto, have you no shame..? Perhaps make up an excuse like you will be sick that day or they don’t allow visitors or you’re going on vacation…something…

   

   Clint

   24 October 2009 at 11:10 pm

   Reply
   • Perhaps make up an excuse like you will be sick that day or they don’t allow visitors or you’re going on vacation…something…

     Or maybe that I’m like Rosa Parks…

     Sorry Clint. I read your “I’d be happy to make an appointment to come to the station and discuss this with Leo, yourself and anyone else and on the air” as a request for a meeting.

     Contact Leo if you’d like to be on his program. Best of luck.

     

     Ernesto Aguilar

     24 October 2009 at 11:34 pm

     Reply
9. Since this got buried in an unrelated post, I’ve recapped this discussion on my personal blog. If you are interested in the discussion that got dropped in comments, feel free to visit and add in:

   http://ernestoaguilar.org/conspiracy-debate-pubmedia-redux/

   

   Ernesto Aguilar

   30 October 2009 at 1:23 am

   Reply
10. [...] KPFT for Leo’s terming Jones a conspiracy theorist. I engaged Milby, who posted about Leo at my KPFT blog, and was called a despot for my disagreement. A fairly vanilla debate on a radio program culminated [...]

    » Conspiracy Debate & PubMedia Redux Ernesto Aguilar

    30 October 2009 at 7:46 am

    Reply