University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan

Home , 1934 in radio, 1941 in radio, 1949 in radio, Howl, KPFA, KSFH

70-14,102

STEBBINS, Gene R., 1934- LISTENER-SPONSORED RADIO: THE PACIFICA STATIONS.

The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1969 • Mass Communications

1970

THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED LISTENER-SPONSORED RADIO: THE PACIFICA STATIONS

DISSERTATION

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University

By Gene R. Stebbins, B.A., M.A.

******

The Ohio State University 1969

Apposed b

Adviser rtment of ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

No work such as the present one could be under taken without substantial help and assistance from a great number of people. The author is deeply indebted to many persons, including the followingr the Board of Directors of Pacifica Foundation for permission to do research in the records and papers of Pacifica and KPFA, the many persons now associated with KPFA who contri buted valuable information, the many former KPFA staff members who consented to lengthy interviews, and a number of persons who by correspondence contributed sig nificant information, including Mr. Norman Jorgensen, attorney," Mr. Johnson D. Hill? and Mrs. Joy Hill. To two women who have never met, but without whom this work would never have been possible, go the author' deepest appreciations Mrs. Vera Hopkins, Secretary to Pacifica Foundation, whose patience and assistance far exceeded that asked; and the author's wife Judy, whose proofreading and suggestions were invaluable.

ii Finally, the author wishes to acknowledge the persons noted in these pages and many who are not whose devotion, patience, and perseverence are responsible for the existence of the Pacifica stations. They were fre quently unpaid, grossly unrewarded, and usually unappre ciated. Without them, Pacifica could never have been. The program schedule reproduced in Appendix C is from the KPFA Folio, copyright by Pacifica Foundation, used by permission.

iii VITA

September 1$, 1934 . . Born, Dayton, Ohio 1956 B.S., Business Education, Manchester College, North Manchester, Indiana 1956-1959 Teacher, Northwestern High School Springfield, Ohio 1959-1960 Teacher, Thomas Mack Wilhoite High School, USNAS, Port Lyautey, Morocco 1960-1961. Graduate Assistant, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, Ohio. 1961 * . . M.A., Speech, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, Ohio 1961-1965 Instructor in Speech, Denison University, Granville, Ohio 1965-1969 • Assistant Professor of Speech, Sacramento State College, Sacramento,. California

FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Speech Studies in Broadcasting: Professors James E. Lynch, Richard L. Mall, and Harrison B. Summers Studies in Public Address: Professor Harold F. Harding Minor F;ield: Education. Professor I. Keith Tyler

iv TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii VITA iv LIST OF TABLES vii LIST OF FIGURES ix Chapter I. INTRODUCTION 1 A. Review of Related Literature B. Description Co The Importance of the Study D. Hypotheses II. NONCOMMERCIAL BROADCASTING AND LISTENER- SPONSORSHIP 15 A. Early Broadcasting By Educational Institutions B. Reservation of Educational Channels C. Precedents for Support of a Station by Listeners III. BEGINNINGS OF PACIFICA FOUNDATION 32 A. The Founder Lewis Hill B. Planning for a Radio Station C. The Richmond AM Application IV. EARLY BROADCASTING IN BERKELEY 54 A. KPFA-Interim B. Silence C. The Renewed KPFA V. FINANCIAL STABILITY UNDER THE GRANT FROM THE FUND FOR ADULT EDUCATION, 1951-1955 113 VI. ORGANIZATIONAL PROBLEMS 148

v VII. GOVERNMENTAL INVESTIGATIONS OF PACIFICA STATIONS 204 A. Loyalty B. Transfer of Control C. Programming VIII. PACIFICA STATIONS IN THE SIXTIES 280 A. The Union and the Strike B. Programming of KPFA C. Critical Evaluation of Programming D. Financial Support IX. THE SUBSCRIBERS OF KPFA 308 X. KPFA AND OTHER STATIONS 349 XI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 366 APPENDIX A. PROGRAM SCHEDULE, KPFA-INTERIM, September 1949. . 375 B. PUBLIC SERVICE PROGRAMS BROADCAST BY KPFA, September 17, 1962, to January 6, 1963. .... 377 C. PROGRAM SCHEDULE, KPFA, March 2-8, 1969 384 D. SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE AND COVERING LETTER 392 SOURCES CONSULTED 395

vi LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Total FM Receivers Manufactured and Metropolitan San Francisco FM Penetrations, 1947-1954. • • . 130 2. KPFA Public Affairs Programs by Category- October 20, 1965? to February 20, i960 .... 290 3. KPFA Programming by Categories, March 2-B, 1969. 292 4. Financial Data for KPFA by Years 304 5. Summary of Findings of Two KPFA Surveys, 1950 and 1955 310 6. Education Levels of KPFA Subscribers, 1965 . . • 313 7. Mean Scores, Liberal-Conservative Scale 330 8. Reported Voting Record .... 332 9. Comparison of Ranking of the Performance of President Nixon and Governor Reagan 333 10. Mean Scores on Liberal-Conservative Scale by Ratings Given to President Nixon 335 11. Reported Educational Level 337 12. Reported Family Income . 33# 13. Reported Use of News Media 339 14. Newspaper Doing a Better Job Reporting News. . . 340 15. Television Station Doing a Better Job Reporting News 341 16. Television Station Doing a Better Job in Public Affairs Programming ..... 342 17. Outstanding Total Programming on a TV Station. . 342

vii id. Radio Station Doing a Better Job Reporting News. 343 19. Radio Station Doin£ a Better Job of Public Affairs Programming 344 20. Radio Station Whose Total Programming is Outstanding . « « 343

viii LIST OF FIGURES

1. Map Showing 1 mv/mile Contour of KPFA, Berkeley . . 121

ix CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

"In my opinion, Pacifica should lean toward programs that present either opinions or information not available elsewhere.Firm in this belief, Lewis Hill established a small FM radio station at Berkeley, California, in April, 1949. Today, the Pacifica Foundation operates radio sta tions in three major metropolitan centers—Berkeley (serv ing the San Francisco area), Los Angeles, and New York. These stations are unique in American broadcasting, because nearly all of their financial support comes directly from listeners rather than from advertising or an education al institution. Hill felt that only in this way could the greatest potential in radio be realized with complete free dom from sponsor bias and vested interests of station owners. Programming on Pacifica stations is considerably different from the typical fare of radio stations in the United States. It has been described as "stimulating, absorbing, bold, and often controversial," 2 as "programs

-J Lewis Hill, as quoted in Eleanor McKinney (ed.), The Exacting Ear (New York:Pantheon, 1966), p. 32. 2Gale R. Adkins, review of McKinney, The Exacting Ear, in Quarterly Journal of Speech, LIII, No. 2 (l£67), p. 193.

1 2 that were unforgettable," 3 and a new dimension and a fresh voice—different and dissenting.

A. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE A number of studies have examined commercial radio or television stations. 5 Another work investigated an individu-

^Harold Winkler, "Pacifica Radio—Room for Dissent", NAEB Journal, XIX, No. 3 (i960), p. 95. ^"Jack Gould, New York Times, July 10, I960, Sec. 2, p. 15. ^A partial listing of these might include: James E. Lynch, "WJW-TV; a History" (unpublished Master's thesis, University of Michigan, 1949)I Charles Gordon Shaw, "The Development of WJR, the Goodwill Station, Detroit" (unpub lished Master's thesis, Wayne State University, 1942), Erling S. Jorgenson, "Radio Station WCFL: A Study in Labor Union Broadcasting" (unpublished Master's thesis, University of Wisconsin, 1949)? Phillip Friedman, "KXOK, the Star-Times, St. Louis, Missouri" (unpublished Master's thesis, Univer sity of Missouri, 1950); Jack Ansell, Jr., "The Story of a Station: A History of the Radio Station WDAF, Owned and Operated by the Kansas City Star with Simultaneous Refer ences to the History of U. S. Radio" (unpublished Master's thesis, University of Missouri, 1950); Maryland W. Wilson, "Broadcasting by Newspaper-owned Stations in Detroit, 1920- 1927" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1952); Wilburt James Richter, "The History and Development of Television Station WTTV, Channel 4, Bloomington, Indiana" (unpublished Master's thesis, Indiana University, 195#)? George M. Stoke, "A Public Service History of Radio Station WFAA—$20" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Northwestern University, 1954; Nellie Graham Colbert, "A History of Radio Station WJBO, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, with Emphasis on Programming Policies and Practices, 1943-1952" (unpublished Master's thesis, Louisiana State University, I960); Lillian J. Hall, "A Historical Study of Programming Tech niques and Practices of Radio Station KWKH, Shreveport, Louisiana, 1922-1950" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Louisiana State University, 1959)? Sammy Richard Dana, "A History of Radio Station KMLB, Monroe, Louisiana, with Em phasis on Programming Policies and Practices, 1930-1953" (unpublished Master's thesis, Louisiana State University, I960); Stephen David Buell, "The History and Development of WSAZ-TV, Channel 3» Huntington, West Virginia" (unpub lished Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University, 1962); 3 al closely identified with a particular station.^ In addi tion, individual histories of broadcasting have centered on a commercial station, 7 or include valuable material about g early station operations. However, the emphasis in a major ity of these studies and histories tended to be on the over all operation of the stations, measured in terms of financial success. Lichty observes: "Very few of these provided more than fragmentary information on the content of programming of Q these stations." The primary difference between the studies cited above and the present work is that the former concern sta tions operated commercially for profit, while this study in volves stations operated noncommercially, where the purpose of the station is to provide the highest quality programming to listeners rather than to show a profit. Although the Pacifica Foundation operates two of their three major transmitters on commercial channels, they are all

Lawrence W. Lichty, '"The Nation's Station'—A History of Radio Station WLW" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University, 1964). /: Ansel Harlan Resler, "The Impact of John R. Brinkley on Broadcasting in the United States" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Northwestern University, 195&). ^William P. Banning, Commercial Broadcasting Pioneer: The WEAF Experiment. 1922-192& (Cambridge: Harvard Univer sity Press, 1^4b). Especially Gleason L. Archer, History of Radio to 1926 (New York: American Historical Co.. 1^28) and Big business and Radio (New York: American Historical Co., 1939). ^Lichty, p. 11-12. 4 licensed as noncommercial educational stations.^ Most of the literature of noncommercial radio and television stations involves those operated by colleges and universities or local school districts, rather than the broader community-wide • 11 foundation type of organization utilized by Pacifica.

The FM frequencies from $8 to 92 megacycles (twenty channels) are reserved for noncommercial educational stations. KPFA (Berkeley) operates on 94.1 mc., a commercial channel. W3AI (New York) had been a commercial station before being donated to Pacifica, and is also licensed on a commercial channel. KPFK (Los Angeles) is on a noncommercial channel (90.7 mc.). In addition, a second transmitter in Berkeley duplicates simultaneously the KPFA signal to overcome "shadow" areas of poor reception on the main channel caused by the mountainous terrain. Its call letters are KPFB, operating on 89.3 mc. (an educational channel) with 150 watts power, considerably less than the other three stations which are 59 KW (KPFA), 110 KW (KPFK), and 10.3 KW (WBAI). 11 Some of these are; Barbara J. Maurer, "The History of Station WHA, 1926-1931" (unpublished Master's thesis, University of Wisconsin, 1957)5 Richard D. Morgan, "A Report of the First Year of Broadcasting by Indiana Univer sity's Radio Station WFIU" (unpublished Master's thesis, Indiana University, 1952)5 Van Buren Joyner, "A Historical Study of Radio Station WABE-FM" (unpublished Master's thesis, University of Wisconsin, 1955)I Marilyn Mayer Culpepper, "A History of Radio Broadcasting at Michigan State University from August, 1922, to January, 1954" (unpublished Ph.D. dis sertation, University of Michigan, 1956); Patricia L. Green, "Radio in the Public Schools of Portland, Oregon; The Historical Development of Educational Broadcasting in the Public Schools of Portland, Oregon, and of the Schools' Radio Station KBPS" (unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, New York University, 195°)» John S. Pen, "The Origin and Develop ment of Radio Broadcasting at the University of Wisconsin to 1940 (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1958)| William B. Stegath, "Radio Broadcasting at the University of Michigan, 1922-1958" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1961)J Kenneth L. Barter, "An Historical Investigation Illustrating the Evolution of Programming at WOSU-TV from 1956 through I960" (unpublished Master's thesis, Ohio State University, 1962). 5 One dissertation examined the development of policy by the Federal Communications Commission toward noncommercial educational stations.12 Other individual studies have surveyed noncommercial stations operated by land-grant colleges and universities,13 carrier-current stations in colleges and -11 "1 c universities, ^ noncommercial radio stations in Indiana, -i educational FM stations of the United States, and educational stations of the United States.17

1 9 George H. Gibson, "The Development of Federal Policy Toward Noncommercial Educational Broadcasting,1® (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of North Carolina, 1961). "^Tracy F. Tyler, "An Appraisal of Radio Broadcasting in Land-Grant Colleges and State Universities of the United States," (Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1932, later published by the National Committee on Education by Radio, Washington, D.C., 1933)• "^Stephen Couger Hathaway, Jr., "A History and Des cription of Collegiate Carrier-Current Broadcasting" (unpub lished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1959). James R. Boyle, "A Historical and Descriptive Study of Noncommercial Educational Frequency Modulation Broadcast ing in Indiana, January 1944 to July 1963." (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1964). 1 6 Richard C. Stevens, "A Survey of Educational Fre quency Modulation Radio Stations in the United States" (unpublished Master's thesis, University of Denver, 195#)• "^Ebrahim Rashidpour, "A Survey of the Present Func tion and Some Aspects of the Organization of Educational Radio Station in the United States" (unpublished Ph„D. dis sertation, Indiana University, 1965). 6 One study investigated a noncommercial educational radio station not controlled by a school, college or univer- 1$ sity—a station owned by Riverside Church in New York City. Despite this wealth of studies concerning the histor ies or descriptions of noncommercial educational radio sta tions, only two have directly involved Pacifica stations or the listener-sponsorship concept. One thesis, by Ragan 19 in 1963s is a descriptive study of the listener-sponsorship con cept, with primary emphasis on the financial success of the plan. Ragan concludedt In striving to accomplish the two goals of con tributing to human understanding and the dissemina tion of a full range of public information, one would have to agree that the Foundation, working under severgQfinancial handicaps, has been very successful. Ragan®s work, while comprehensive in its limited area, gives little information about the formation of the station, the organizational problems encountered, or the investigations by the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee or the Federal Communications Commission.

"1 A Roderick D. Rightmire, "Riverside Radio WRVR: The History and Development of a Church-owned Radio Station," (unpublished Master's thesis, Boston University, 1962). "^George R. Ragan, "Pacifica Radio; A Description of Listener-Subscription Radio" (unpublished Master's thesis, Stanford University, 1963). 20Ibid., p. 35. 7 21 The other thesis, by Winston, is a study of the audience of a serious music station, KEAR, in Palo Alto. It used KPFA subscribers in Palo Alto as one control group in a survey of segments of KEAR listeners. Winston's findings, while useful, are focused primarily on the KEAR groups, and in respect to KPFA, are confined to those subscribers within a small geographic portion of the total KPFA signal area. The present research will attempt to correlate some of Winston's findings, discussed in detail in Chapter IX, with the entire KPFA audience. Also, over the years, a number of audience surveys have been conducted by the staff of KPFA. The findings of these surveys are discussed in Chapter IX. In summary, no comprehensive study of the history and programming philosophy of Pacifica Foundation and radio station KPFA has been undertaken. That will be the purpose of this dissertation.

B. DESCRIPTION Design. The work was designed to explore the rela tionship of Pacifica's unorthodox broadcast philosoply to that of other radio and television stations. Through analy sis of the listener-subscription plan of support and histori cal investigation of Pacifica Foundation and its radio

21 Donald Charles Winston, "Some Personality Attri butes of the Serious Music Audience" (unpublished Master*s thesis, Stanford University, 1955). 8 station KPFA, it was hoped that the impact of this type of noncommercial operation could be assessed. The study also sought to discover the extent to -which listener-sponsorship permitted freedom to air provocative programming on a wide variety of subjects. Finally, the design included study of the composition of the subscriber group. Method. The method utilized historical investigation of the founding of Pacifica Foundation in 1946, the estab lishment of KPFA in 1949 s. and the operation of KPFA through the present. Both theory and practice of Pacifica program ming were analyzed through the papers of the Foundation, the program schedules, and critical response to programs actually aired. A descriptive analysis of the station's subscribers was constructed through a survey designed to provide a political and demographic profile of the persons supporting the station. Primary sources were materials in the files of Pacifica Foundation, interviews with persons who are now or have been closely involved with the operation of KPFA, and government documents from the FCC and Senate Internal Secur ity Subcommittee relating to Pacifica Foundation and station KPFA. Secondary sources were newspaper and magazine articles about the station, as well as several previous studies of the audience and financial operation of KPFA. The descriptive portion of the study utilizes primary materials gathered by the writer through a survey of sub 9 scribers and analysis of current program schedules. A de tailed explanation of the method used in conducting the sur vey will be found in Chapter IX. Organization. The work generally follows a chrono logical development, beginning with a review of noncommer cial broadcasting, the founding of Pacifica in 1946, and continuing to the present. However, for the convenience of the reader, several chapters cover overlapping periods of time so that the complete development of related topics could be recorded in the same chapter, such as the FCC investigations and intf .'nal organizational problems. The second chapter reviews the development of non commercial broadcasting, especially in the United States and other forms of listener-sponsored broadcasting. Chapter III describes the founding of Pacifica Foundation and its early efforts to establish an AM radio station. Chapter IV dis cusses the establishment of KPFA-Interim, its financial fail ure, and the renewed operation during the period 1949 to 1951. Chapter V covers the period of the grant from the Fund for Adult Education,1951-1955. Beginning with Chapter VI, the study departs from chronological development, analyzing organizational diffi culties within Pacifica Foundation and KPFA from 1950 to the present. Chapter VII discusses various governmental investi gations of Pacifica Foundation stations from 1963 to the present. Chapter VIII presents recent developments in the 10 history of KPFA, as well as an analysis of present program ming. The findings from a survey of KPFA subscribers are found in Chapter IX, comparing their political inclinations, education, income, and age to a control group randomly selec ted from the same geographic area. Chapter X discusses KPFA's relationships to other stations, and Chapter XI pre sents the conclusions of the work. Limitations of the Study. One of the major limita tions was the difficulty in finding primary materials not originating from Pacifica Foundation. Recognizing the possibility of inherent bias in Pacifica documents, the writer considered it desirable to secure as much research material as possible from other sources. Aside from FCC documents and the report of the SISS hearings, these mater ials were virtually unobtainable. The majority of non- Pacifica documents, other than the governmental materials mentioned above, were secondary materials such as reviews by critics and magazine articles. On the other hand, complaints to the FCC incorporated into official government documents in most cases represented an equally strong bias against Pacifica. Opinions and decisions of the Commission itself, being made after examin ing evidence and deliberations should be considered reason ably objective. In the same way, it was found difficult to interview individuals who had first-hand knowledge of the station, yet 11 had not been associated with the operation of the station at some time. However, it was the writer's experience that most of the persons who had worked or were working with the station were much more objective in their evaluations than had been expected. This was especially pronounced among those who had been away from the station for some years, and these persons gave valuable insights into the philosophy of Pacifica. Limitations of time and financial resources prevented interviews with several persons living on the East Coast who might have been able to further aid the research. These were Mrs. Joy Hill, Eleanor McKinney, and Norman Jorgensen. Contacts with these persons was restricted to correspondence. Financial resources also made it impossible for the writer to travel to the Los Angeles and New York stations for detailed research into the operation of those stations. Therefore, the work had to be confined to the operation of KPFA as representative of the Pacifica stations. Likewise, limitations of time and financial resources dictated the use of a mailed questionnaire for the survey of subscribers. A survey conducted by personal interview undoubtedly would have gained a higher percentage of response and perhaps would have provided more information, especially in regard to voting behavior. The choice of a mailed ques tionnaire also prevented research into the reasons why some listeners support the station while others do not, which 12 would have been a valuable addition to the study. Finally, it is possible a limitation on the work exists in the form of a favorable bias on the part of the writer. It should be pointed out that the Pacifica stations were selected as subjects for study because of the writer's belief that the programming of KPFA represents a genuine attempt to serve the "public interest". Thus, the reader might expect a certain amount of bias in any comparison drawn between KPFA and commercial broadcasting stations.

G. THE IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY In the American system of broadcasting, the basic law places primary emphasis on "serving the public interest, convenience, and necessity". Determination of the exact meaning of this phrase has been a difficult task for those who operate radio and television stations, as well as for those charged with regulating these stations. Far too often, this obligation is interpreted by commercial broadcasters to mean that a station must devote a minimal amount of time to those program types specifically cited in the past by the FCC as desirable. These include agricultural, discussion, educational, religious, public affairs, local live, and sustaining programs. 22 Most stations known to the writer present programs in these categories with as little prepara-

22See FCC, "Public Service Responsibilities of Broad cast Licensees''^ (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1946). This document is known to broadcasters as the "Blue Book". 13 tion and expense as possible, since programs in these cate gories seldom attract a commercial sponsor. Although some broadcasters have consistently presented outstanding pro grams within these "public service" categories, the perform ance of a major portion of the nation's broadcasters, especially the smaller local stations, in these program types has been one of minimal effort devoted to programs placed in the schedule at hours when the public is least likely to hear or view them. On the other hand, KPFA is a radio station that for twenty years has made a serious effort to present the best programs possible within its resources in the areas of arts, serious music, controversial issues, and children's program^, not as a necessary addition to its program schedule, but as its reason for being. It has devoted its entire program schedule to these areas, airing such programs in time periods when the maximum number of listeners could hear them. In order to prevent sponsors from influencing the content of programming, the station has no commercials. Instead, it asks listeners to support the station so that high quality programming might continue. In view of the unorthodox operation of KPFA, it is important that a comprehensive study be made of the station, as well as the people who were influential in its develop ment. Such a study might suggest whether the basic finan cial plan of the station can be expected to sustain a high 14 quality radio service in other metropolitan areas. It also should be of value to those who have the obligation to determine the best use of broadcast frequencies in future years. In view of the several significant FCC decisions in response to complaints about Pacifica programsf this work may be expected to produce insight into the background of these decisions.

D. HYPOTHESES Four major hypotheses are projected as the basis of this study. (1) Listener contributions can successfully sustain radio service devoted to specialized programming including widely divergent viewpoints. (2) A listener-supported station will be able to offer intellectually challenging programming of a complete ly different nature than that offered by commercial broad casting stations in the United States. (3) KPFA, in broadcasting a wide variety of views on controversial matters and frank language in artistic performances, has secured for all broadcasters far-reaching statements by the FCC defending the right to air serious programs in these areas. (4) Listener-subscribers of KPFA will tend to be more politically active and liberally oriented than non- subscribers. CHAPTER II

NONCOMMERCIAL BROADCASTING AND LISTENER-SPONSORSHIP

Although the Pacifica stations utilize two commer- i cial and two noncommercial channels, all the stations are operated as noncommercial educational radio stations. Since this is a special type of broadcast licensee set up by the FCC, a brief review of the history leading up to the estab lishment of this type of station license will be presented. In addition, precedents for the plan of listener-sponsorship will be examined.

A. EARLY BROADCASTING BY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS Much of the early history of broadcasting involves educational institutions, for they were as interested as others in the newly discovered radio waves. In the begin ning, their interest was largely confined to investigations into the nature of radio waves rather than programming, as is evidenced by the large numbers of licenses issued to physics or engineering departments. These were mostly experimental licenses, with no regular schedule being main tained by the licensees.

1See footnote 10, p. 4. 15 16 Thp FCC recognizes WHA at the University of Wiscon- sin as "beginning operations in 1921".2 Smith cites evidence that WHA may be the nation's oldest continuously operated broadcast station, 3 although the claim of being the oldest is also made by othersNevertheless, broadcasting as we know it started sometime in 1921 or 1922. By 1925, there were about 5^0 licensed radio stations, of which 171 were licensed to educational institutions. There is little doubt that WHA is the nation's oldest educational radio station, since it broadcast several lecture series in the spring of 1922. These early stations were mostly five and ten watts in power, and as late as 1927> most stations used no more than 150 watts.7 As such, they could be housed in a cabinet of about six to eight cubic feet or in a closet. Since

2 FCC, Educational Radio, Bulletin No. 21-B, Washing ton, September, 1966, p. 1. -^R. Franklin Smith, "'Oldest Station in the Nation?®" Journal of Broadcasting, IV, No. 1, (Winter 59-60) pp. 40-55. ^"Such as WWJ, Detroit; KDKA, Pittsburgh; and KQW, San Jose. See Gordon B. Greb, "Golden Anniversary of Broadcasting," Journal of Broadcasting, III, No. 1, (Winter 53-59)? pp. 3—135 and Archer, History of Radio to 1926, pp. 207-8 and 215-6. 5FCC, Educational Radio, p. 1. Smith, p. 53• "^Of the 575 stations listed March, 1924* only 145 (2^fo) used a power of more than 150 watts, and only 10 used powers as high as 1000 watts. Radio Broadcast, V, (May, 1924), pp. §6-92. 17 they were inexpensive to assemble and operate, many of the early broadcasters participated as a hobby or as part of the new "fad", with little thought of operating a station with a fulltime broadcast schedule and paid employees. Likewise, educational stations put together by members of the physics or engineering departments were primarily for experimentation. Seldom did anyone consider maintaining a regular schedule. Only a few visionary men gave any thought to the potential of radio for education. On August 28, 1922, radio station WEAF in New York City broadcast the first paid announcement. However, because of the agreements between American Telephone and Telegraph (who owned WEAF) and the Radio Group (RCA, Westinghouse and General Electric), most stations did not carry advertising. Those that did violated the patent licensing agreements'under which their transmitters had been built. These agreements were modified in 1926, when AT&T withdrew from active participation in broadcasting. Nevertheless, in 1927, the Fourth Annual Radio Conference recommended that advertising be confined to "goodwill" Q announcements. Thus, it can be seen that until the late 1920's there was little distinction between commercial

$ Sydney W. Head, Broadcasting in America, (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1956), p. 117. o ^Fourth Annual Radio Conference, Proceedings and Recommendations for Regulation of Radio, Washington; Government Printing Office,1926), p. lS. id and noncommercial stations, with programming being the most pronounced difference. While the commercial stations developed a method of support for their operation that was to become highly pro fitable, the educational stations were floundering. Since both competed for the same frequencies, educators soon found themselves out-maneuvered. Many gave up in the face of tightened technical operating requirements that demanded better and more costly equipment. Others were overwhelmed by legal fees and travel expenses required to defend their frequencies against commercial applicants. Frost 10 totals the number of licenses granted to educational institutions between 1922 and 1936 as 202, but by 1936, he found only thirty-eight still in operation. Two-thirds of the licenses lost by educational institutions were held less than three years. Five years later, Atkinson reported only thirty-^one stations operated by educational institutions, with four others in educational use.11 Further, only fifteen of these

10S. E. Frost, Jr., Education's Own Stations, (Chicago % University of Chicago Press, 1937), p. 3-5. 11The other four were WLBL, Wisconsin State Depart ment of Agriculture| WSUS, Buffalo Board of Education? KBPS, Portland, Oregon, operated by Benson Polytechnic High School5 and KPAC, Port Arthur College (Texas), not listed in any educational directory. Carroll Atkinson, American Universities and Colleges That Have Held Broadcast Licenses (Boston: Meador Publishing Co., 1941),p. 11. 19 were authorized for nighttime broadcasting, and ten of the thirty-one were operated as commercial stations. This drastic decline in stations was caused by several factors. Firsts, educators were slow to recognize the potential of radio and to support the existing stations with adequate financial backing. The depression made the total finances available to colleges and universities limi ted, making it a poor time to find support for a new, unproven medium. Second, many stations had been started as physics or engineering experiments, rather than an activity of the college or university as a whole. When the license was threatened by a commercial station, many college adminis trators were happy to co-operate with the community busi nessmen. Third, the tightening of technical standards by the FCC put financial pressures on the already shaky educational radio stations. Many simply did not have the resources for the purchase or building of improved transmitting equipment. Fourth, in the competition for available frequencies and broadcasting hours, the educators fought a hopeless battle. It was easy for a college to give up and sell its license to commercial interests, but once done, the license was lost forever to the educational community. In addition, commercial stations, seeking more time on shared frequencies 20 and more power where it would cause interference to an educational station, often boldly filed request after request for hearings looking toward the revocation of the educator's license. In this respect, the attitude of the Federal Radio Commission can hardly be said to have been favorable towards preserving the educational stations during the period of 1927 to 1937. The experience at the University of Arkansas is typical of the problems faced by educational stations in that period. The University of Arkansas operated a station for more than nine years, beginning late in 1923. Its first assignment was on 1140 lcc. with 100 watts, unlimited time. In December, 1924, it was shifted to 1090 kc. with 500 watts. A month later, it was moved to 1000 kc. and six months later authorized for 750 watts. In April, 1927, its power was reduced to 500 watts, and in June, it was ordered to shift to 1010 kc. The following March it was authorized to use a power of 1000 watts, but in October, 1923, it was moved to 1390 kc. and ordered to share time with KLRA, a local commercial station. In 1929, KLRA requested fulltime use of the frequency, making it necessary for university offi cials to travel to Washington for a hearing. Although the request was denied, within a year KLRA filed a second re quest for fulltime operation, requiring another Washington hearing. This time, 75 per cent of the hours, including all nighttime hours, were given to KLRA. The hours available 21 to the University included only six a week that it found suitable for its programming. After nine changes in its original license, the station was sold in 1933» Its subse quent commercial owners received permission to operate at a power of 5000 watts during all daytime hours. 12 However, the educational community was not without its spokesmen on behalf of educational broadcasting. The Association of College and University Broadcasting Stations (ACUBS) had been formed at the Fourth Annual Radio Confer ence in Washington in 1925 • It was one of the participat ing agencies at a conference called by Commissioner William Cooper of the U. S. Office of Education in 1930 concerning education and radio. The latter conference called on Congress to reserve fifteen per cent of all broadcasting channels permanently and exclusively for educational institutions and governmental educational agencies.13 In 1932, Congress asked the FRC to survey education al programs of both commercial and noncommercial stations. To the dismay of educators, the FRC chose National Educa tional Week as a "typical week" to be surveyed, then con cluded that the commercial stations were devoting ample 1 time for educational programming. L.

"^Frost, pp. 21-24. "^John W. Powell, Channels of Learning (Washington: Public Affairs Press, 1962), p. 29. 14Ibid. 22 In 1934, the ACUBS changed its name to National Association of Educational Broadcasters (NAEB), and led the fight for educational reservations as a part of the new Communications Act then before Congress. No such reservations were included in the Act as passed, but the new Federal Communications Commission (FCC) was directed by Congress: ....to study the proposal that Congress by statute allocate fixed percentages of radio broadcasting facilities to particular types or kinds of non profit radio programs or to persons identified -jr with particular types of non-profit activities. The report of the FCC, sent to Congress in January of 1935, again concluded that the commercial stations provided ample opportunity for educators to use existing facili ties, and therefore, no special allocations of frequencies or percentages of total licenses were needed for this purpose. To have decided otherwise would have meant the revoking of commercially held licenses to provide stations for the educatorsf a prospect that was anything but work able in the existing regulatory climate. On the other hand, experiences of educational institutions were demonstrating that commercial stations could not be reasonably expected to provide time at an hour and in sufficient quantity to meet the needs of

"^Communications Act of 1934, Section 307 (c). 1 f>"FCC Opposes Class Allocation Plan," Broadcasting, February 1, 1935, p. 35. 23 educational institutions. Time was frequently given and a program series started, only to have the hour shifted or cancelled to meet commercial demands for station time. Likewise, the college or university that had no station often had no one on its staff who was able to prepare pro grams of reasonable quality. Yet the station manager felt his duty fulfilled when he made time available for educa tional programs. The result was often educational programs of low qualityj further discouraging both educational administrators and station managers. From the commercial station's point of view, educational programs of this kind hurt the station, since they not only attracted small audiences, but also made it harder for the following comm ercial programs to draw a substantial audience.

B. RESERVATION OF EDUCATIONAL CHANNELS The Educators continued to press for educational reservations. In 193# came a small, but very significant victory. The FCC, on January 26, 1933, announced the establishment of a new class of stations, called "noncom mercial educational broadcast stations", to be licensed only to agencies which showed that the station would be used for "the advancement of the agency's educational work and for the transmission of educational and entertainment programs to the general public".17 Twenty-five channels

"^FCC, Fourth Annual Report (Washington: Gov't. Printing Office, 1938), p. 66. 24 were made available for such use, but in frequencies that were far above the standard broadcast band, making it impossible to receive these signals on the typical receiver.

Amplitude modulation was to be used, although the Ccm- mlssioh stated: Amplitude modulation shall be employed exclusively unless it can be shown that there is a need for fre quency modulation, in which case such modulation may be authorized provided sufficient channels can be grouped so as to obtain the required bandwidth without causing interference to established stations or preventing the full expansion of the service.15 It does not seem that the Commission intended to reserve these frequencies solely for educational stations, but so far as can be determined, no other use was made of them during the time they were so assigned. This decision was important for several reasons. First, it was the first admission by the FCC that separate stations were needed by educational institutions, a rever sal of their previous statements. The decision implied that there were needs of educational institutions that were not being met by commercial broadcasters. Second, it was the first use of the phrase "non commercial educational broadcast stations", now used by the FCC to describe all operations in the reserved fre quencies and other stations licensed as noncommercial in the commercial frequencies.

i rt FCC Rule 1059 (c), as quoted in Report of Radio Activities; Station WBOE (Cleveland, Ohio: Cleveland Public Schools, 1939), p. 9. 25 Third, it included direct classroom broadcasts, general educational programs, and entertainment programs within the types of programs to be transmitted by these stations, giving implied approval to the programming of the existing educational stations operating in the stand ard broadcast band. Fourth, it assured commercial broadcasters that these stations would never compete for the advertising dollar, by specifying that they were to be noncommercial. The FCC defined this by stating that no sponsored programs or commercial announcements were permitted, and programs of other classes of stations could be rebroadcast only if all commercial announcements and commercial references were deleted. This guaranteed that these stations would not be sold to commercial interests and become still another competitor, as had been the case with so many of . the licenses held by educational institutions in the stand ard broadcast band. The Cleveland Board of Education received the first license under the new service in 193& for station WBOE, the first "noncommercial educational broadcast station", although some twenty-five stations were actually operating in such a manner within the standard broadcast band. Educational FM Stations. In 1940, the FCC issued rules establishing FM broadcast service in the 42-50 mc. frequency band. The noncommercial educational stations 26 were allocated the first 1000 kc. of this band in place of the frequencies allocated a year earlier. Th£ FCC also specified that the educational stations were to use FM "unless a showing of a need for amplitude modulation is made", a reversal of its rule of a year earlier. The shift to FM reduced the number of available channels to five, since FM requires a wider bandwidth than AM. But the FCC pointed out that the allocation of these five channels, adjacent to the commercial FM band ....not only places the educational stations on an entirely independent basis, but also gives them the benefits of the developments in the service rendered by the commercial stations.19 The reader will note that between 42 and 50 mc. there are forty channels, of which the five reserved for educational stations are 12.5 per cent, nearly the per centage called for by groups seeking reservations in the standard broadcast band. In spite of the shortages caused by the war, six noncommercial stations were operating on these frequencies by 1945» all with FM (including Cleveland which converted its station to FM). Construction permits had been issued to six others and twenty-two applications were pending. 20 In 1944 > the FCC announced hearings looking toward a complete revision of allocations in the higher frequency

•^FCC, Sixth Annual Report. (Washington: Gov't. Printing Office, 1940), p» 69. 20FCQ Eleventh Annual Report. (Washington: Gov't. Printing Office, 1945), p.~22. 27 bands, including television and FM services. Educators had learned that their voices must be heard. Among those testifying on behalf of more FM channels for education were the NAEB, National Education Association, American Council on Education, and the U. S. Department of Education. The revised allocations moved the FM band to 88-108 mc., but included twenty channels for education out of a total of one hundred, or 20 per cent of the total channels. The noncommercial stations were assigned to frequencies of 38-92 mc. In making these allocations, the FCC again pointed out the benefits of keeping non commercial and commercial channels adjacent; "FM recei vers will include both bands enabling noncommercial FM to grow with commercial FM, both services being available to the public. Although the educators never succeeded in getting a better share of the standard broadcast (AM) frequencies, they did succeed in getting FM channels reserved for educational use, paving the way for later similar reser vations of television channels. The FM service was not developed as rapidly as the FCC had anticipated, since the television boom of the next decade drew the public's attention. However, by July 1, 1969, there were 2,018

21FCC, Eleventh Annual Report, p. 22. 23 commercial FM stations and 375 noncommercial educational 22 FM stations on the air.

C. PRECEDENTS FOR SUPPORT OF A STATION BY LISTENERS Thus far, only stations supported by educational institutions have been considered. These stations only indirectly derive their funds from listeners, whether their parent institution be publicly- or privately- supported. In both cases, the operation of the station is only a small part of the total program of the institution, and rarely figures significantly in the ability of the institution to secure adequate financial support for its total program. The plan adopted by Pacifica called for direct support of the station by its listeners, as an end in itself, rather than as a small part of a larger program. The concept of the listener directly supporting a broadcast service was a new and novel idea in the United States when proposed by Lewis Hill for KPFA in 1948. A few stations in this country had occasionally solicited contributions from their listeners, to keep a specific program on the air, or in times of financial crisis, to support the station until things got better. Most of these appeals were on behalf of classical music program ming, although religious programs have long solicited

22From FCC records, reported in Broadcasting, July 14, 1969, p. 64. 29 funds on behalf of their specific program. Neither of these practices was used by any station to support its total operations over an extended period of time, and like wise, no station had proposed to support a noncommercial service solely from listener contributions. In Europe, listener-sponsorship has several indi rect precedents, although there are no direct analogies. Most of the European countries have long used license fees on receivers to support their broadcasting services. Only Spain and the Soviet Union presently do not require the owner of a radio or television set to purchase a yearly license, although in Luxembourg the proceeds do not support the broadcast services. 23 The British Broadcasting Corporation is almost entirely supported by such license fees, levied on all radio and television receivers, whether they are used to watch BBC programs or those of its commercial competitor, the ITA, which does not share in the license fee revenue. Hence the major difference between these systems and the KPFA listener-sponsorship plan lies in the mandatory nature of the former. The listener provides the financial support in both cases, but in the European systems it is mandatory, while the KPFA plan is entirely voluntary on the part of the listener, to support a broadcast service that he has found desirable.

23^Burton Paulu, Radio and Television Broadcasting on the European Continent^ (Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press, 1967)» p. 90. 30 Although a number of European countries have listener-supported noncommercial systems in competition with commercial systems (as found in Great Britain), in all cases, the commercial systems were the last to be in augurated. On the other hand, the commercial system was well established when the concept of a noncommercial listener-sponsored station was introduced in the United States by KPFA. Perhaps the European plan most similar to that of KPFA is found in the Netherlands. Here, a number of broadcasting societies compete for member contributions to support their programming on a noncommercial radio service. A similar plan, with greater centralization and the recent addition of limited commercial support, is used for television. Transmitter facilities are operated by the Postal Union, which receives the major part of license fees. From 1924 to 1940, broadcasting was sup ported entirely by the broadcasting societies through contributions from members, but after World War II, they began to receive a portion of the receiver license fees. 2ZL The various soci&ties receive air time in proportion to their memberships. Thus, a listener can encourage the programming of a particular society by joining (or remain-

p J Digest of the Kingdom of the Netherlands; Edu cation, Arts and Sciences, (Amsterdam: The Netherlands Government Information Service, 1965)? p- 10. 31 ing a member). He can weaken the society by refusing to join or quitting if he disapproves of its programming. However, it must be observed that although there are similar basic ideas common to both the Netherlands plan and the KPFA plan, they are drastically different in practice, in that KPFA faces an entrenched and reasonably well-accepted commercial system in a country which has come to regard the free reception of programs as an inherent right. These conditions are quite absent from the Netherlands broadcasting system. Although Lewis Hill was undoubtedly familiar with European concepts of noncommercial broadcasting, especially that of the BBC, there is no evidence that he was parti cularly influenced by any of them in formulating his plan for KPFA. Undoubtedly, he considered the total spectrum of broadcasting systems in searching for a workable alter native to the profit-motivated American system. But in view of the striking differences between the plan he adopted and the foreign systems discussed above, and the lack of any evidence making any connection between the two, the writer must reject the theory that Hill modeled his plan after an existing broadcast system. CHAPTER III

BEGINNINGS OF PACIFICA FOUNDATION

A. THE FOUNDER LEWIS HILL There were many persons essential to the establish ment of Pacifica Radio, The success of the project re quired the dedication of a number of gifted individuals, willing to contribute their talents to a new ideal. But the story of Pacifica Radio in its early days is dominated by one man Lewis Hill* The center of activity, the prime impetus, the basic creativity and the underlying philosophy of KPFA and the Pacifica Foundation in the early period of 1946 to 1952 were those of Lewis Hill. Lewis Kimball Hill was born May 1, 1919, in Kansas City, Missouri, into a family best described as wealthy. Family interests included his mother's family holdings in petroleum and his father's control of the Atlas Life Insurance Company. He showed himself quite proficient in a number of things at an early age, according to his father's recollec tions s Mien he was about six years old, he wanted to make one of the old time crystal set radios. I spent about seventy-five cents for parts which I gave him

32 33 together with a cigar box for his cabinet. This re sulted in a perfectly good crystal set...Lew was intrigued by the radio beginning with his crystal set... When he was eight years old, I gave him a ukelele which he soon could play as good as Arthur Godfrey... On one occasion there was an oratorical contest in his public school which he won, apparently on an ad lib basis, because he had not practiced...At Wentworth Military Academy he played the piano in the school orchestra although he had had no musical lessons.1 Hill was an unusually gifted person. Those who worked with him in the Pacifica venture are nearly unanimous in their appraisal of his talents: he was a genius or near-geniusj he was exceptionally creative, especially in literature and public affairs5 and he had foresight beyond the others in the group. These quali ties often made him impatient with those who did not grasp concepts as quickly as he did. An accomplished poet, he had several poems published in national maga- zines2 and authored a small volume of verse. 3 He had an excellent radio voice, using it effectively on a wide range of programs. Some of these tapes have been pre served in the Pacifica Archives. It is also this author's

"^"Johnson D. Hill, letters to author, July 12 and 16, 1968. O Such as "For the Complaint of Love," Poetry, Vol. 82 (June 1953)> p» 136.' At one time, the volume was nearly ready for pub lication but Hill later destroyed most of the poems. A few are recorded on tape in the "Young American Poets" series in the Library of Congress. 34 conclusion after reading countless letters authored by Hill during his career at KPFA, that he was exceptionally proficient at tactfully, yet forcefully, stating the case for the station and seeking financial support for it. One letter from among the hundreds will illustrate; More than two years ago a representative of Pacifica Foundation wrote to you about a new radio project in the San Francisco Bay area. I cannot guess whether you remember that correspondence. It arose, on our part, from our impression that you were interested in the concept of radio that might be supported entirely by small subscriptions from its listeners, without commercial advertising. I am writing now to acquaint you very briefly with what has happened to the Pacifica project after its three years of development. It has built and operates station KPFA in Berkeley, which is engaged in the first experiment in America with non-commercial broadcasting based on listener- subscriptions. Its impact in the San Francisco region after four months on the air has quite ex ceeded any expectation, although it is estimated that approximately two years will be required to make the station self-supporting from subscriptions. I have enclosed random copies of KPFA's bi-weskly program publication, which will give a clear picture of the station's activitiesj and also a clipping from the San Francisco Chronicle which will provide some impression of the project's immediate success from a radio standpoint. Possibly you remember that at the time you were first notified of this undertaking, the Foundation's problem was to raise enough money from contributions to put a station on the air. It has accomplished that. It is still struggling to obtain the contri butions necessary for its operating reserve, to meet the estimated deficits of a two-year approach to self-support through subscriptions. A balance of some $32,000 is still required for that period. My purpose in writing at this moment is to deter mine whether this subject is close to your concerns, and if so, whether I might see you to outline the 35 project in greater detail during a forthcoming trip in Southern California, which I expect to make toward the end of the forthcoming week. I would greatly appreciate hearing from you.4 After attending the public schools of Tulsa, Oklahoma, in 1935 he entered Wentworth Military Academy in Lexington, Missouri. There he completed the final two years of his high school education. His father states that he was sent there "for purposes of discipline and primarily because credits from this school were readily accepted by universities." 5 Hill later spoke of this period as one of his most unhappy experiences, particu larly since he disliked the military discipline of the school. In the words of one of his associates at Pacifica, "he hated every minute." £ In spite of this, he did well enough scholastically to be admitted as a freshman at Stanford University in the fall of 1937. At Stanford, Hill selected a heavy emphasis in English and philosophy courses. Although he was at Stan ford for four years between the fall of 1937 and the spring of 1941, he was not awarded a degree. After reviewing his record, the present Stanford registrar offered this explanations

^"Lewis Hill, letter to Edwin Janes, Jr., August 11, 1949. ^Johnson D. Hill, letter to author, July 12, 1963. ^Mrs. Beverly Ford-Aquino, personal interview, July 6, 1968. 36 I feel sure that Mr. Hill could have received a Bachelor's degree at Stanford if he had chosen to do so, but instead in the spring of 1940, he trans ferred to the University Division. By entering the University Division, a student is authorized to by-pass a Bachelor's degree and work directly toward a Master's degree. Mr. Hill did not complete his Master's degree program.' Other events in the closing days of 1941 were to play a great role in the course of Lewis Hill's life, With the declaration of war, he began a struggle with his conscience. As has been previously indicated, Hill had found the military thinking and discipline at Wentworth quite contrary to his nature. At Stanford, he soon found others who shared his distaste for the use of force to solve the problems of mankind. His studies in philosophy brought him into contact with the writings of many paci fists, among them, those of the Quakers. He found himself rejecting war and killing as a means of solving disputes. When he was called for the draft, he registered as a conscientious objector, and refused to enter the army. Such men who refused induction into the armed forces during World War II were sent to Civilian Public Service (CPS) camps about the country, to do work in forestry and re clamation, or hospital work. Hill was sent to Coleville, California, to work on a reclamation project. However, his health, never strong, began to fail and he was discharged for medical reasons in 1943.

7Harvey Hill, Registrar, Stanford University, letter to writer, July 29, 1968. 37 Upon his discharge, he moved to Washington, D.C., to run the American Civil Liberties Union office. The work of the ACLU at that time largely involved represent ing conscientious objectors,, He also took a part-time job at radio station WINX as an announcer. Shortly afterwards the station was bought by the Washington Post, and Hill was promoted to Night News Editor, permitting him to continue working for the ACLU during the day. There are several versions of his departure from WINX. It is certain that Hill and the station management were frequently at odds about the treatment of news. His father states that "he differed with management over what g was and was not news". Some of his associates at Paci- fica are under the impression that he got fed up and quit, one stating that he walked out in the middle of a newscast because he was required to read a dogfood commercial after a story about war casualties. However, his wife states her recollections: ...There were frequent irritations over the one- sidedness of news treatment, and Lew felt keenly the absence of minority views in all commercial radio news and programming but I don't recall any specific dispute. He planned to go on ahead [to • San Francisco] to find an apartment and a job, while I remained in Washington at my job to ease the family income problem and train a replacement for my own employers. And this is what he did.°

Johnson D. Hill, letter to author, July 16, 1968. ^Mrs. Joy Hill, letter to author, August 15, 1968. 3S B„ PLANNING FOR A RADIO STATION Hill found a job as a News Editor at radio station KYA in San Francisco, beginning there March, 1946. But his primary mission was to start a new kind of radio sta tion that would be different from the existing commercial stations. He had constantly speculated about how the means of communication, both newspapers and radio, could be used to better man's plight—which to him meant peace, social justice, promotion of the labor movement, and support of the arts. It necessarily involved the widest possible discussion of every subject matter under iron-clad guar antees of free speech. Every minority view, no matter how unpopular, had to be given equal opportunity to be heard. This was the kind of station that Lew Hill had in mind. But how could such a station be established? And how could it be supported? Existing radio stations seemed to Hill to be dedi cated to pleasing the advertising agencies and the spon sors. Controversy was sure to offend the sponsors, the source of the profits. There were occasional discussions of "public affairs", consisting of analysis of world affairs and their influence on the existing American economic position, and, of course, the usual political speeches. But Hill saw that little was heard of the paci fist view, the labor view, the civil rights view, and the social reformist view. The broadcasting of these views 39 might have upset a sponsor enough to cancel a profitable account. An interesting example can be seen in the case of WHKC, Columbus, Ohio resulting in an order from the Fed eral Communications Commission in 1945. The United Auto Workers charged that WHKC had refused to sell time to the union for the discussion of union issues, although it carried sponsored network commentators who showed a strong anti-union bias, and also carried programs including "commercials" by large corporations which were anti-union in content. The union further charged that the station offered sustaining time to the union, but exercised such rigid censorship over the content of the union's presen tations on such programs that the union was unable to make any kind of effective presentation. The FCC ordered a hearing as to whether the license of WHKC should be renewed in view of the charges. The station stated that in refusing to sell time to the union, it was conforming to the provisions of the Code of Prac tices of the National Association of Broadcasters, pro hibiting the sale of time to membership organizations such as unions, and also prohibiting the sale of time for one-sided presentations on controversial issues. Before the hearing was concluded, the station sub mitted a revised statement of policy which had been approved by the union. It stated that the station would 40 sell time to the union as well as grant free time for the discussion of controversial issues. It also pledged that the station would not censor scripts of programs involving controversial issues except to delete portions that were contrary to law. In approving the revised policy state ment and dismissing the hearing, the FCC stated ...the spirit of the Communications Act of 1934 requires radio to be an instrument of free speech ...the operation of any radio station under the extreme principle that no time may be sold for the discussion of controversial issues is inconsistent with the concept of the public interest.10 It was the attitude represented by the management of WHKC, typical of most radio stations of the time, that led Hill to observe in his prospectus for KPFA; ...despite the high incidence of unionization and the consequent involvement and interest of hundreds of thousands in labor affairs and news, newspapers and radio stations in the [San Francisco] area report on labor only when it is a protagonist of conflict, the antagonist of "business". Unfortunately the only press and radio sources of consistent and comprehen sive labor reporting are either controlled by the Communist party or Stalinist in inclination. There is no source, Communist or other, which incorporates labor news with general news reporting in any fair and real istic proportion.il Apparently Hill had discussed the problem extensive ly during his stay in CPS camp, and while in Washington.

i n United Broadcasting Co., 10 F.C.C. 515, 5 R.R« 799, 1945. ^"•^Pacifica Foundation, "KPFA, A Prospectus of the Pacifica Station," Berkeley, California, May, 1948, p. 5. (Hereinafter referred to as "KPFA, a Prospectus.") 41 His wife states that "The idea of starting a non-commercial radio station was discussed between us from the summer of 1945 on." 12 At the time of his arrival in San Francisco, he seems to have had a general idea of starting an inde pendent operation of some kind that would aid the situa tion o He had concluded that many of the reporters working in radio could do an objective job of reporting news and presenting public affairs programs if they were permitted to do so by management. Hill concluded he must start his own station, to be controlled by the reporters and other staff members. He would eliminate the sponsors so far as possible, since he believed radio and press should not be run by entrepreneurs motivated by profits, but by journalists and artists whose motive would be the most objective and enlightening pro gramming possible. By necessity, such a venture would have to be non-profit. The problem was to put these ideas into a real, working example. The idea of a newspaper was discussed. It could be centered in one locality, but distributed across the nation, gaining additional support. On the other hand, newspapers were expensive to capitalize, and there were already several pacifist publications that barely paid their way. They suffered from the additional drawback that

"^Mrs. Joy Hill, letter, August 15, 196S. 42 they tended to circulate among the small circle of those already persuaded to the pacifist position, rather than the general public that Lev/ Hill wanted to reach. Radio, on the other hand, required a minimal invest ment, and had a potential reach to nearly every household. In view of Hill's background in radio, it is not surpris ing that the discussions quickly centered around a radio station. He began to see that it might be possible to start a radio station of the type he envisioned in the Bay Area. Why San Francisco? His wife states: The original idea was to make the station a co-operative. The San Francisco area was selected because co-ops abounded and at that time had the energetic leadership of Jeff Cohelan; the Bay Area housed a large number of colleges and cultural institutions that could provide resource material as well as listeners, and Lewis had found the beauty of the area appealing during his stay at Stanford University .J-3 Slowly, a group formed with Hill the acknowledged leader. After several months of discussions, the group decided to begin formal actions. Among the first was to form on August 24, 1946, the Pacifica Foundation, a non profit corporation. Directors were Lewis Hill, H. Don Kerschner, Homer Sisson, William Trieste, and John Waldron. The purposes of the corporation were: (1) To encourage, and provide outlets for, the creative skills and energies of the community; to conduct classes, study groups and workshops in 43 writing and producing of dramaj to establish awards and scholarships for creative writings to offer public facilities to amateur instrumentalists, choral groups, orchestral groups, and musical students5 and to promote and aid other creative activities which will enrich the standards of art and entertainment in the community. (2) To promote the full distribution of public information; to obtain access to sources of news not commonly brought together in the same medium; and to employ such varied sources in the presentation to the public of accurate, objective, comprehensive news on all matters vitally affecting the community. (3) To engage in any activity that shall contri bute to a lasting understanding between nations and between the individuals of all nations, races, creeds and colors; to gather and disseminate information on the causes of conflict between any and all of such groups; and through any and all means available to this society to promote the study of political and economic problems, and the causes of religious, philosophical and racial antagonisms. (4) To establish and maintain radio, school, news paper, printing, publishing, and bookstore facilities, and any other activities that may be deemed necessary or appropriate to the carrying out of any of the pur poses of this corporation. (5) To do such things and engage in any such activity as shall serve the educational, recreational and cultural welfare of its members and the public.J-4 In view of later developments, it is important at this time to examine closely the type of organizational control that was established. There were five on the Committee of Directors originally. However, Article VI stated;

Pacifica Foundation, "Articles of Incorporation of Pacifica Foundation." as submitted to FCC in appli cation for AM radio station, Richmond California, February 6, 1947* Exhibit 1, Article II. 44 That special authority is hereby delegated to the members of this corporation to change the number of directors thereof at any time by the adoption of a By-law to that effect.-*--' The duties and powers of the Directors were spelled out in the By-laws: The business and property of the corporation shall be managed by a committee of Directors... Directors shall be elected by the Executive Members at the annual meeting of the Executive Membership, for a term of two years... Meetings of the Committee of Directors shall be held not less frequently than once each month, at such times and places as it may from time to time deter mine. Special meetings may be called by the Chairman, or any three of the Directors, and may be held at any time without notice by unanimous consent of the Directors. ...Every decision of a majority of the Directors present at any meeting of said Committee, duly called and held, a quorum being present, shall be valid as a corporate act, except where otherwise provided in these By-laws... A vacancy or vacancies in the Committee of Directors... may be filled by a majority of the remaining directors, though less than a quorum...1° From this it can be clearly seen that the Committee of Directors was to be the controlling group in the Corporation. In form, the entire document would seem to be close to that of a Co-operative, probably the model of Hill's organizational structure. Executive Members were to be those persons active in the affairs of the corporation, but who were not elected to the Committee of Directors. Qualifications for Execu tive Members were;

15Ibid., Article VI. l6Ibid., Article IV. 45 Any person who is in continuous active partici pation in the Foundation or in any one or more of its activities... Upon approval of such nomination by a two-thirds vote of any Executive Membership meeting duly called and held, the said nominee shall become an Executive Member...3-7 The By-laws provided for two meetings of the Executive Membership each year, the September meeting being designated the annual meeting for the purpose of electing Directors. Four officers were provided for in the By-laws: a Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Secretary, and Treasurer. The Chairman and Vice-Chairman were required to be chosen from among the Committee of Directors. The Chairman was to act as the chief administrative officer of the founda tion, and to preside at meetings of the Executive Member- ship. Hill was elected Chairman. In July 1946 a prospectus for a radio station was issued by the group, although the Articles of Incorporation had not yet been filed. Nevertheless, the station was discussed in terms of one of the activities of the Pacifica Foundation. The purposes of the station, however, were somewhat more narrow than the broad goals listed in the Articles of Incorporation for the Foundation: Few problems confronting the cause of peace have been accented as firmly in recent years as the need for new channels of education. Already existing

17Ibid., Article II. lgIbid.. Article V. 46 organs of thought and information in this field ... are designed in the main to serve an inner circle of specialized memberships...men and women dedicated to world understanding—especially since 1939—have been made to feel their severe impotence in the surge of public affairs outside their subscription and mailing lists. If prevention of war depends in part upon an overwhelming public sentiment against it, the groups most devoted to war prevention are still without any of the means of widespread communication needed to engender such sentiment....The major job for those determined to see a pacific world in our time is, therefore, to enter the region close to home, to speak through the newspapers, on the street, and over the radio stations... The Foundation will seek to develop an educational program based on two general uses of its facilities: 1. Direct analytical commentary on current events (radio commentary, speeches,... etc.) 2. General promotion of higher ethical and cultural standards and of a keener public under standing.. .19 The Foundation's choice of a radio station as the initial enterprise was definite by this time. This choice was justified; Establishment of a full-sized metropolitan daily newspaper with three or more editions would require very large financial reserves, considerably beyond the funds which might be made available even from the most able and dedicated personal sources. On the other hand, while only a relatively small sum would be necessary to begin operation of a bookstore or publishing house, these enterprises could hardly be expected to provide the surplus earnings neces sary for expansion. A radio station is unique in both aspects, requiring relatively little initial capital and returning large earnings in a short period if intelligently operated.

"^Pacifica Foundation, "A Radio Prospectus," San Francisco, July, 1946, p. v-vi.

20t, . , Ibid., p. ix. 47 C. THE RICHMOND AM APPLICATION The initial prospectus envisioned the possibility of an AM station to be located in Richmond, California, using a frequency of 1210 kc. with a power of 1000 watts. The prospectus detailed statistics of the Richmond popu lation and industry, the proposed programming, and the financial projections for the proposed station. The proposed programming listed five types of program types. Music programs were to be of three types: classical, popular, and folk music. News programs were to include labor news, national and international news drawn not only from the newswire services, but also di verse other sources. This was contrasted to the nearly universal practice of the day called "rip-and-read", meaning to read the wire copy exactly as it came over the wire without any checking or editing. Drama would feature original drama produced in the Experimental Workshop, and include a heavy emphasis on children's programs. Civic programs would analyze the local problems in Richmond, a growing community. Finally, religious programs would include discussions, religious services, and religious music. The proposed station would sell commercials, but such commercial sponsorship was to be limited to one-third of the total broadcast time. Not more than forty commer cial spot announcements were to be aired during any one 43 broadcast day. No spot announcements were to be included in the station break before or after a commercially spon sored program. All commercials were to be carefully screened, to eliminate any commercial that: ...misrepresents any article or service, presents false or misleading or exaggerated claims, makes misleading comparisons, or creates a misleading impression. (Advertisers are expected to file data with the station to support any claims that depart from recognized or generally accepted fact.)... makes irritative or excessively repetitious use of names, slogans, or catch-phrases, singing, music, or sound effects...makes use of vague or2unverified testimonials from individuals or groups. Patent medicines or remedies were to be specifically excluded. The prospectus also included estimates of the total amount needed to establish the station, $35*000. In addition, it was estimated that a cash reserve of $15,000 would be needed to cover operating costs of the first year of operation. The total establishment cost, then, was estimated at $50,000. This first prospectus was followed by a revised edition in November, 1946, in which it was noted that the frequency for the station would probably not be the one originally selected (1210 kc.). February 2, 1947» the Foundation filed an application with the Federal Communi cations Commission to construct a new station with a power of 1000 watts to operate on 710 kc. in Richmond,

21Ibid.. p. 29-30. 49 California. In the exhibits for this application, the program ming categories were narrowed to four (from the previous five): instructional! general education including public affairs, social problems, serious music, drama, and re lated artsj those intended primarily to gain and hold audience attention (light entertainment) j and finally- other programs arising out of the Foundation's responsibility as licensee of a public radio channel. 22 In spite of this re-defining of program categories, the programming plans were virtually identical to those in the earlier prospectus. The same three music categories were listed (classical, folk and popular). News programs were to come from the same "widely diversified" sources rather than depending solely on newswire services. The same emphasis was placed on forum and discussion programs. In the summary of the programming exhibit, it was noted: It is the Foundation's belief that at the outset, the freedom of the proposed station from any obli gation to sell the maximum possible amount of air time will provide constant opportunity to experiment with new and more constructive service and entertain ment programs. If listener-subscription support of the station proves feasible, eliminating all adver tising, this factor will be increased.23 Income was projected on the maximum of one-third of

22Pacifica Foundation, "Application for AM Radio Station, Richmond, California," San Francisco, submitted to the FCC February 6, 1947, Exhibit 7» p. 22. ^Ibid., Exhibit 7, page 31 • 50 broadcast time being commercially sponsored. However, it is clear from both the above statement in the programming exhibit, and the following statement in the revenue exhibit, that the idea of listener-sponsorship was gaining more support among the group: As soon as practicable, income for sustenance of this medium will be derived from listener subscriptions to the station's operating fund. To its listener- subscribers the Foundation will furnish a periodical dealing with the educational programming of the station ...It is not supposed that subscriptions to maintain the station can be raised until an actual audience has been interested. As a means of developing this audience, the Foundation intends at the outset to operate the station with a minimal, self-sufficient and restricted type of advertising,... Such advertising will be on a diminishing scale as subscriptions are expanded. It is expected that the station can depend wholly on subscriptions for its operation within five years from the date of its establishment.24 One other fact should be noted in discussing this application. The frequency selected was 710 kc., between two powerful network stations in the San Francisco area. These were KPO, operating on 630 kc. (now KNBR, owned by NBC) and KQW, San Jose, operating on 740 kc. (now KCBS, owned by CBS), both stations being authorized to broadcast with a power of fifty thousand watts. During this period the FCC was revising the Standards of Good Engineering Practice, generally with a view of liberalizing them. But the FCC had never authorized stations in the same metropolitan area to operate with a separation of only 30 kc. from existing stations. The Pacifica application

24Ibid.. Exhibit 19, p. 51 51 . proposed such a 30 kc. separation from not one station,

but from two stations broadcasting with maximum power. Probably,, the optimism of the group was aided by the substantial testimony of various engineers before the Com mission in favor of permitting assignments with 30 kc. separation. However, representatives of both NBC and ABC testified and presented briefs opposing the proposal. 25 At any rate? the application depended upon a favorable de cision from the Commission on this matter, and also success fully overcoming competing applications from two other groups who desired to establish stations on the frequency. Without a favorable decision from the Commission permitting 30 kc. separation for stations, there was no chance for a Richmond station on the 710 kc. frequency. While they waited for the Commission's decision, comparative hearings were in progress. The other two groups both were from Modesto, and proposed typical radio service. Hill and John Waldron, the engineer of the group, attended two days of hearings in Washington in March of 1947. An additional date for hearings was set for April 2 in San Francisco. The Pacifica application seemed to be superior to the others in all respects except the financial showing. The group had been able to secure pledges amounting

^Lewis Hill, letter to Rupert Pray, March 23, 1947• 52 to only $11,000. Their Washington attorney felt that they should be able t>o show at least 120,000. Nevertheless, Hill was optimistic. He wrote to a friends ...the hearing was extended to provide an additional session in San Francisco on April 2. This gives us the opportunity to file an amended balance sheet, and show, if we can, financial competence....There seems little doubt of our winning if we can fulfill a mini mal financial arrangement by the April 2 deadline.2" With a pledge of fifteen thousand dollars from Mrs. Francis C. Day three days before the hearing, the Pacifica group was able to show total assets of more than thirty- one thousand dollars, more than enough to demonstrate to the Commission that they had the financial ability to establish the station if they were awarded the frequency. The prospect was much brighter. In July of 1947, the Commission issued a decision denying the proposal to permit stations to operate with 30 kc. separation, prohibiting station assignments of 30 kc. separation where the 25 mv. contours would overlap. This doomed the Richmond application for 710 kc. for it lay well within the 25 mv. contour of both KPO and KQW. Hill was terribly discouraged, but a sense of his mission drove him on. He wrote to a friend: If you'll forgive the cliche, we're down, but not out...With an imponderably straight face, they [the Commission] declare for the 25 mv/m overlap rule— the rule which will protect the big established metro politan interests by denying, presumably, applications

2^Lewis Hill, letter to Rupert Pray, June 12, 1947. 53 like ours...We have devoted some thought already to our course of action. As you know, the group is animated by a splendid desire to save the world, and the ambi tion to look beyond this obstacle arises not only from the fact that so much time and money have already been invested. I personally begin to feel as though I were on my tenth Crusade....but I have a couple of hard lunges left in this same direction. The first step...will be to have the channels surveyed again...But most of our attention, I believe, will focus necessarily on the problems of purchasing existing facilities in the area.2' This was Hill's preference. However, no desirable stations were available at a price that was within the means of the group. The group shifted its attention to the FM spectrum where there were quite a few unused channels available. The drawback was that there were, as yet, few receivers in the hands of the public. But the group decided that if their program service could be established, perhaps funds would be more readily available for the purchase of an AM station if one became available at a price within their reach. Correspondence and records show that Hill had exam ined FM from the beginning of the discussions of a radio station for the group. He had had little enthusiasm for FM up to this point. Now he had little choice but to turn to FM. Executive Membership on September 16, 1947» voted to file an application for a station on the FM band, but also to keep investigating any possible means for an AM station. The application for an FM station was filed October 20, 1947. CHAPTER IV

EARLY BROADCASTING IN BERKELEY

A. KPFA - INTERIM The task of applying for an FM station was essen tially to adapt the application that had been previously filed for an AM station in Richmond to fit the new require ments. The group decided to change the proposed site from Richmond to Berkeley in applying for an FM station. It is not clear just when this decision was made, but when the Executive Membership voted to apply for an FM station on September 16, 1947, it was specified that it was to be proposed for Berkeley, rather than Richmond. Although there is no direct evidence as to why this decision was made, several factors undoubtedly influenced the change to Berkeley. First, the FCC generally has looked with more favor on those applications specifying facilities which would provide the first local service to a community, especially in competitive hearings. The earlier decision to apply for an AM station in Richmond was undoubtedly made with the full awareness that both Oakland and Berkeley already had established AM stations, while Richmond had not. But since the likelihood of a

54 55 competitive hearing for an FM station was remote, this need to enhance the application by providing the first local service to the community was greatly diminished. Thus, the group could select Berkeley if it seemed a more desirable community for the station. Second, in pursuing the Richmond application, the group had secured extensive promises of co-operation from officials at the University of California (located in Berkeley), especially Dr. Waterson Dickerson, Assistant Director of the Extension Division. Concrete discussions had been held concerning the possibility of conducting classes in radio production and radio writing at the station, taught by staff members. Moving the station to Berkeley enhanced these possibilities. Third, the station envisioned a greatly increased schedule of live music over that proposed for the AM sta tion. This was to exploit the higher fidelity broadcast ing possible with FM. The Berkeley location promised a greater access to the musical talent associated with the University there. Finally, the success of the FM station would depend on how soon a significant number of homes were equipped with FM receivers. In 194S, only about twenty per cent were so equipped.''" In their surveys of the Bay Area,

''""KPFA, a Prospectus," pp. 5-9. 56 the Foundation had found the residents of Berkeley enjoyed one Oi the nighest living standards in the country at that time.2 Coupled with the intellectual community associated with the University, this made it much more likely that a greater percentage of the population in Berkeley would possess FM receivers, or could be persuaded to buy them to receive the programs that the new station would present.

B. THE FM APPLICATION The application for an FM channel in Berkeley was filed in two parts. The application filed October 20, 1947, included the ownership and programming sections, but omitted the engineering portions. This latter part was completed later and filed December 19, 1947, proposing the use of channel 261 (100.1 mc.) with a power of 1000 watts effective radiated power. It took the FCC just slightly more than three months to approve the application. March 31, 194&, the construction of KPFA by the Pacifica Foundation was authorized. The group was faced with a difficult decision. Up to this point, it had been easy to discuss the possibili ties of a station. Nov; the time had arrived to take the opportunity offered and make something of it. Yet there was an understandable hesitation.

2Ibid., p. Id. 57 The original idea was to build an AM station. No AM frequency was available. The shift to FM involved many uncertainties. It was new, unproven, but apparently gaining in popularity. Some experts were predicting that it soon would replace AM as the basic radio service. If this were true, here was a golden opportunity. Hill, himself, seemed to have some misgivings: We will jockey a bit during the next few months, holding on to the FM and watching for an AM purchase possibility. Actually, there is damned near enough money in the bank to put a Class A FM station in operation...What worries me is only that television is bound to land with an enormous splash out here in a little while, and where will that leave FM...?3 The prospectus for the new station was optimistic: The Bay Area is the terminal of a substantial part of America's international commerce, and also houses many of the world's foremost artists and intellec tuals. Centered here are some of the nation's major institutions of learning and, at the same time, one of its fastest growing industrial populations. This huge amphitheatre of 2,000,000 individuals will fall entirely within the primary service contours of KPFA.^ In other respects, this document was essentially a re-write of the earlier prospectus for an AM station in Richmond. Although the tone was generally one of bright prospects for the FM medium, the new prospectus did not dismiss the AM potential lightly: The Foundation's AM application is still pending in Washington ...but the Commission's engineering rules made subsequent to the application have re moved any expectation of a grant of the Richmond

•^Lev/is Hill, letter to Rupert Pray, October 2, 1947. ^""KPFA, a Prospectus," p. 2. 5B station. Radio properties in the AM spectrum from time to time become available for purchase? and the Foundation, while not budgeting at present for the purchase of an existing station, will inform its supporters of any unusual opportunity of that nature.5 The revised prospectus surveyed the Berkeley community, as to its potential audience and programming resources, as well as describing the proposed programming for KPFA. The latter were essentially those proposed earlier for Richmond, with a greater emphasis on "live" music to take advantage of the greater fidelity possible in FM broadcast ing. The programming was to be in four divisions; Music, Drama, Public Affairs, and Children. "KPFA is designed to become one thing to all people—the source of the area's most incisive and continuous examination of public affairs, and of its richest and most consistent unfolding of musical and dramatic values."6 Programming would not be tied to the traditional half-hour and hour time blocks, but would be programs in periods that would last as long as was necessary to achieve the purpose of the program. This was predicted to "mean a small revolution in quality for the listener". 7 Public Affairs programming was to include news, gathered from all available sources, rather than read

5Ibid., p. vi. 6Ibid.. p. 12. 7Ibid.. p. 13. 59 straight from newswire copy, the prevailing practice of commercial stations. Public affairs programming also was to include the presentation of opposing viewpoints: Only the public forum provides an opportunity for ideas to gain currency in the presence of their opposing ideas; and an idea favored in the full knowledge of its opposition is more stronglv favored by that fact than if it sought favor alone.® This was a much stronger statement of the "competition of ideas" theory than was present in the earlier prospectus. The reader will see that this principle became quite important in the subsequent operation of KPFA. To carry out his "competition of ideas," the sta tion would broadcast each week: one featured forum pro gram, one program in which a lone individual in public life defends his position against two or more interro gators, and one roundtable of expert discussion on the ascertainable facts underlying currently controversial issues or events. Music programming stressed the much better repro duction of undistorted signals possible through FM, especially when broadcasting "live" concerts, that is, those performed in the station's studios, as opposed to recorded music. The state-of-the-art in recording in 194# still left much to be desired in terms of frequency response and distortion levels. The microgroove record ings that became the mainstay of the high fidelity fan's

gIbid. 60 record had yet to be introduced, and tape recording was still in its infancy. The prospectus stated flatly: But it will be always true that the ultimate in music transmission can be achieved only by the live performance0of musicians before an FM studio ~ microphone.' Music types were to be of the "concert, recital and folk" categories, programmed by a Director of Music, "a finished instrumentalist with thorough grounding in the theory and history of music".10 Drama programing was to include two major produc tions each week: a full-length drama broadcast several times during the week, and a documentary program. Sources were to include both original and published scripts. Children's programming was to include news, music, and stories programmed especially for children, and dramatic programs utilizing local youngsters in the cast.

Projected Income Very little modification had been made in the basic financial plan of the station. It, of course, had been changed to reflect the slightly different type of trans mitter and antenna necessary to produce an FM signal. The projected total, however, was about the same: $21,000 as the "desired" costs, and $11,000 for the "minimum" costs for construction. Also needed was a fund to cover

9Ibid., p. 15. 10Ibid. 61 the anticipated operating deficit for the first year, placed at $36,000 in the "desired" budget and $31,000 in the "minimum" budget. The revised prospectus retained the concept of limited commercial support: ...KPFA will be operated commercially, and will support itself from commercial revenue after the initial period of stabilization. It will do more than earn its own way; its income will eventually create a surplus providing for its own expansion or the establishment of other stations....to maintain a continuous educational program without permanent dependence on annual donations.H and later: ...Sale of time on KPFA will be based on a competi tive rate card and governed strictly by an advertis ing code which eliminates the intrusive, repetitious, and in other ways offensive commercialism common in American radio.^ However, a footnote appended to this last statement gave promise of the eventual plan for supporting the station: Pacifica has under study a plan to eliminate commercial advertising revenue altogether and base support of the station on small annual subscriptions from listeners, who would also receive a monthly publication related to the station's programming. Such a plan, if proven feasible on further study, could be considered only after KPFA has established its audience.13 Hill had concluded that advertising would not support the kind of station he had in mind, but many in the group had yet to realize this. Radio stations during World War II

~^Ibid.. p. iv. 12Ibid., p. 22. "^Ibid.. p. 22, footnote. 62 had had no trouble securing sponsors for nearly all kinds of programming, due to the excess profits taxes and high wartime profits. But in the conversion to a consumer- oriented economy of the post-war years, sponsors again sought the best buys in terms of sales. KPFA was not likely to be such a vehicle. In addition, there was the matter of tax exemption. Little difficulty was experienced in getting the State of California to grant exemption to the Foundation as a non profit corporation. The Internal Revenue Service had serious doubts about the wisdom of granting tax-exempt status to the Foundation, especially in view of the state ments in the Prospectus that talked about "using the surplus earnings to establish other stations..." and proposed to secure income from the sale of commercial time, just as the other tax-paying stations of the country made such great profits. The matter of tax exemption did not seriously concern the officers of the Foundation at first. After all, they did not anticipate significant profits for at least a year. Nevertheless, significant capital donations were needed to put the station on the air, and prospec tive donors were concerned about the tax-exempt status of the project. Without this, there could be no deduction of donations from the donor's own income tax return. The prospect of making a "deductible" donation often made the 63 difference between succoss and failure in the solicitations necessary to put the station on the air.

Construction of KPFA - Interim The original Construction Permit, granted March 31»

194$? had been renewed November 20, 194$. January 10, 1949» the Executive Membership of the Foundation voted to proceed with the construction of the station. As was' noted earlier, this group had the authority to make binding decisions for the Foundation. The decision was a difficult one. Slightly more than $15,000 was immediately available, and there was no immediate prospect of any substantial increase of this sum through contributions. It was decided that experimental activity on the air, on the smallest possible scale, would both prove many of the Foundation's theories of broadcast ing and provide the concrete basis for the project's further financial development. But the funds available gave virtually no room for deficit operation for more than a month, rather than the year anticipated in the station's prospectus. Hill described the plans: We are about to build a kind of preliminary, experi mental, interim KPFA. This step is dictated by a fish-or-cut-bait feeling in the project, not by a conclusion of the project's financial and promotional problems. There is considerable hope that we will be able to arrive at the final goals...we have decided the project can't sit on its hands any longer. We must begin to deal in facts as well as plans. There is just enough cash to put a small operation on the air, and we are going to do it. Our past experience 64 indicates that if necessary, we can raise enough money locally from month to month to keep a small operation going... We will begin with the proposition that the prin ciple of good radio is still imagination and a fairly quiet room. A small studio-transmitter set-up with adequate but not lavish equipment, and a very tiny full-time staff, very tiny—five people. Everyone on this staff, each and all of us, will start the project working for a lordly sum of $70 per week... I think we can make the grade all the way to the project's goals. Nothing can guarantee it, but I am certain we will do some important things while we are finding out.1^ The basic decision was to construct a "preliminary KPFA" to serve as a working demonstration of what the group had in mind—and that the full concept of the station could emerge from this small beginning. The facilities actually authorized were a minimal unit, with programming to be simplified, giving a sample of what could be done. Construction was budgeted at $10,714, and a budget of $3,000 per month was set for operation of the station. Construction was begun almost immediately following this decision. A Chief Engineer, Ed. Meece, was hired, and arrived January 19. Within another week, a lease was negotiated for location of the studios and transmitter of the station on the top floor (sixth) of the Koerber office building at 2054 University Avenue. A used 250 watt trans mitter was located in Virginia, and purchased at consider able savings over the cost of a new transmitter. With the antenna designed by Meece, this transmitter would produce

"^Lewis Hill, letter to Rupert Pray, Jan. 11, 1949. 65 550 watts of effective radiated power rather than the 1000 watts authorized, but it was decided to proceed on this basis, A Special Temporary Authority (STA) was applied for from the FCC, and subsequently granted, to permit operation at the lower power. The leased quarters were rather extensively remod eled to permit their use as a radio studio. This included the installation of necessary audio, warning, and speaker circuits creation of sound-proof studios and control rooms; building and wiring a transmitter room; and erect ing the transmitting antenna on the roof of the building. The entire construction period took three months. The station went on the air April 15, 1949• However, a number of problems were encountered during the first two days of broadcasting. Radio frequency (RF) interference from the transmitter was much greater than anticipated, creating noise and distortion in audio circuits and the tape recorder. The exciter controlling frequency proved to be unstable. After three days of broadcasting, the station was off the air for three days to correct these problems. The troubles were solved and the station returned to the air April 21, 1949. The original estimate of construction costs was based on purchasing a used transmitter on the West Coast. This did not prove possible. Total expenses of construct ing the station exceeded the estimate by about $550, the 66 cost of shipping the transmitter across the country.

Programming The station achieved some notice in the local press as it began broadcasting. By and large, it was the sort of notice that accompanied the inauguration of the typical new station,15 although several articles in the San Fran cisco Chronicle showed a glimpse of understanding as to the unusual character of the station's programming; "There are people in radio, as well as out of it, who are highly critical of commercial radio program ming. And a group of such professional critics got together not so long ago to do something about it. They decided to build a station of their own and present a program schedule that could meet, quali tatively, the standards of any critic... It also has an advertising code equally admirable, that may lead the station to an early death. Commercial copy, the code says, will be dignified, informative and brief. There will be no spot announce ments nor singing commercials. That's nice for the listeners and something more radio stations ought to try. But the sponsors aren't going to like it at all."l° And two months laters "Another station that has been doing an exception al job of programming is KPFA, the Berkeley FM sta tion. And it, too, is in need of help from its listeners—financial help. KPFA, now just two months old, was experimental from the start. For one thing, its programs have been almost 50 per cent "live" productions. No other Bay Area station, AM or FM, is doing so much local production. The station has followed a strict code of ethics

"^Berkeley Gazette, April 14, 1949, p. 10. 1 f\Voight, George, "KPFA Seeks Answer to Commercial Programming," San Francisco Chronicle, April 15, 1949, p»4H 67 concerning both program and advertising quality. The schedule has been confined exclusively to good music, drama, educational and children's shows. And now it is asking its listeners to support such a station through financial subscriptions."!' Operation during the first sixteen months was always described as "Interim" operation, reflecting the view that this was experimental operation on a limited basis to prove that such a station could be successful. Neverthe less, programming during this initial period far surpassed that available from any source in the Bay Area at the time, when evaluated on the merits of its cultural worth, its social significance, and its intellectual impact. Hill wrote of this: The programs of KPFA measured by any standard are "idealistic"—that is, they begin with an assumption ' that the listener is a conscious, active and whole individual. Part of this "idealism" consists simply in airing materials and talents which are unobtainable from any other radio source, appealing to the intelli gent interests of adults and children...The familiar phrase "Well our time's just about up!" has no place on KPFA because, while there are long and short pro grams of many kinds, their preconceived duration... is allowed to fulfill itself in terms of program content. A cushion period called Miscellany, follows where necessary...The general result of these prac tices is a radical change in the atmosphere of broad casting, a renewal of its address to the individual.1°

17'Voight, George, San Francisco Chronicle, June 17, 1949, p. 15. i $ Pacifica Foundation, "Report to the Executive and Advisory Members of Pacifica Foundation on the Experiences of Radio Station KPFA In Its First Five Months, " Berkeley, October, 1949, p. 19. (mimeographed, hereinafter referred to as "First Five Months".) 6S During the Interim period, KPFA was scheduled to broad cast from 3^00 to 6;00 p.m., and from 7:30 to 10;30 p.m., a total of six hours daily, seven days a week. Frequent ly the sign-off time was extended to accommodate a dis cussion that was not quite completed, or a concert that had not reached its conclusion. Almost fifty per cent of these broadcast hours were "live" programs, originating in the KPFA studios.^ The programming followed the four types proposed in the prospectus issued for the FM station; Music, Drama Public Affairs, and Children's. Programming from each of these types will be examined.

Music The station's music programming was under the super vision of Americo Chiarito, former editor and publisher of the Portland Music Review, an accomplished musician in his own right who had been instrumental in organizing the Portland Symphony Orchestra. Chiarito was successful in setting up an astonishing number of live musical broad casts, as well as integrating all the station's music into a co-ordinated whole. Musical programs featured many "live" studio per formances, by local professional musicians, artists from

"^See Appendix A for the schedule of programs of September, 1949. 69 the University of California, or advanced student perform ers, The local chapters of the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists and the American Federation of Musicians both granted permission for their members to work for lower than scale fees and to work with non-union performers at KPFA. One of the most unusual programs featured a com poser discussing his work, followed by a "live" or re corded performance. Programs of recorded music differed from the format usually followed by radio stations. Each selection was discussed and analyzed before being played. During one- week, a survey of Mozart works was presented, tracing the composer's career and contributions to music. The station' resources for recorded music were vast, drawing upon the University of California collection, a private collection of folk music owned by Mr. Sam Eskin, and use of the entire inventory of a local record store in return for air "credits."^

Drama The station staff had a number of persons with both writing and acting experience in radio. However, one writer, Rupert Pray, who had figured in Hill's early

20Section 317 of the Communications Act requires such identification of the source of program materials supplied to broadcasting stations, whether commercial or non-commercial. 70 planning, eventually decided he could not leave his lucrative position in commercial radio to join the station staff. Pray had written for both the "Ozzie and Harriet" and "Easy Aces" network programs. It has been noted earlier that the station planned two major dramatic productions per week. This proved to be impossible for several reasonss First, the Interim type of operation was based on minimal operation, prevent ing not only the hiring of adequate numbers personnel but also a sufficient budget to purchase scripts of qual ity. The lack of adequate staff time precluded original drama written by the staff itself. The lack of funds precluded the purchase of quality scripts. Even if these rather substantial obstacles had somehow been overcome, there was neither enough staff time nor studio facilities to produce quality radio drama. The Report on the first five months says simply: "In the first six KPFA [dramatic] productions, a very high standard was reached occasionally, but not consistently."21 Nevertheless, some significant broadcasts were made in the field of drama. A number of BBC dramas were broad cast, mostly classic dramas such as Shakespeare, Chekkov, and Shaw plays adapted for radio by the BBC. Several plays from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation Series

^"First Five Months," p. 32. 71 "Stage 45" were produced. The American listener rarely was able to hear drama from either of these sources.

Public Affairs The interim operation in many respects exceeded the expectations of proposed programming in the area of Public Affairs, but in the news area it was severely limited. The restricted budget made it possible to have only one news wire scrvice from the three available, and this was cancelled after eight months due to financial pressures. The staff did not include even one full-time news person—even though several were necessary in order to give news the kind of treatment the prospectus had envisioned. Panel and discussion programs were, overall, quite successful. Certainly in scope, frequency, and signifi cance, they far exceeded anything available from any other Bay Area broadcast source. E. John Lewis was appointed to the post of Public Affairs Director, succeeded early in September by Robert Schutz. They were successful in involving an amazing number of experts in a wide variety of questions. The programs dealt with international, national, and local issues, both philosophical and con crete. They explored community views seldom aired on radio of the day, such as World Government, Conscientious Objec tors, Racial Antagonisms, Civil Liberties, and Orwell's "Nineteen Eighty-Four." 72 Essentially five program series were aired, although many special programs were broadcast. KPFA Roundtable was a one-hour panel discussion of a controversial topic, moderated by Lewis. Usually four guests participated, selected from those holding differing viewpoints on the selected topic. Critics Circle, generally an hour program, looked to more cultural topics such as "A1 Capp and the Shmoo", "Women, the Lost Sex", and "Censorship and the Arts". It was produced by journalist Hal Bronstein and moderated by Richard Tomlinson, a graduate student in history at Stanford. Men and Issues. This program ranged from fifteen to thirty minutes in length, and was of the interview type. Host was Robert Schutz, who was later to join the staff in a paid, full-time position, but at this time, was a volunteer. Schutz was extraordinarily successful in bringing controversial people to this program. A few of these are; Dr. H. von Woerden, Netherlands Consul to the United States, speaking on Dutch Policy in Indonesia5 Roy Kepler, Executive Secretary, War Resisters League, speaking on Pacifism and War Resistance; George Ready, instructor at Oxford and long-time resident of Russia, discussing Life Behind the Iron Curtain; and James Kutcher, legless veteran discharged from Civil Service on grounds of disloyalty, discussing the Government's 73 Disloyalty Program. Commentators Series. Monday through Friday, a fifteen minute program was aired giving one person's opinion, on specific subjects. The aim was to obtain the widest possible range of opinion by selecting commentators of greatly divergent viewpoints. Each was assigned a turn in rotation to discuss whatever he felt to be of interest or importance. Only two, Hill and Schutz, had any formal relationship to the station except through this series, the others serving on a voluntary basis. This series continues to the present on the Pacifica stations, and the reader will see that it came under close scrutiny by the United States Senate Internal Security Subcommittee at a later date. Children's Programs. From this distance in time, the writer finds this category of programming far more difficult to evaluate as to quality. Nonetheless, the station devoted more than one-sixth of its broadcast day— the hour between 5:00 and 6:00 p.m. plus other times— to children's programs. Programming was of several types: Music, discussions, drama, and story-telling. Specific programs included "Nature Forum," "Growing Up with Books," "Ask Pop" (an informational question-answer program), "Indian Tales," "Once Upon a Time," and "Let's Make Music," (a music appreciation program). 74 The range of topics thus covered was certainly com prehensive and ambitious. The staff felt strongly that more than "cereal-adventures" should be available for children. A survey by the Northern California Listeners' Council showed that Bay Area stations devoted less than 3 per cent of their time to children's programs—and much of that undesirable because of excessive violence or sensationalism. 22 The description of programs shows that the staff made positive efforts to avoid this criticism. Other Programs. A few programs developed that fell outside the scope of the four broad categories. Two of these were Great Books and Inside KPFA. Great Books was produced in close co-operation with the Great Books Foundation, using discussion groups from the San Francisco area, following the curriculum of the Great Books Foundation. Inside KPFA was a unique program, bringing several KPFA listeners into the studios to criticize the station's policies and programs. A detailed program schedule from the first few months programming is reproduced in Appendix A.

Audience Response to KPFA-Interim The KPFA staff, although unable to keep accurate tabulations, reported a steady stream of calls, letters, and visits from enthusiastic listeners. "There was a

00 * Ibid., p. 4tf. 75 constant volume of direct contact with the audience initiated by listeners," 23^ KPFA's programming generated an intense loyalty among its listeners, as the following letters testify: "I believe very much in what you have set out to do. I ran across your station accidentally one day. ...I'll be glad to help in any way I can for I like the idea of getting away from the highly commercial ized radio of today." San Francisco. "This subscription is only the first step. What we need now is some way to rally the support of all the other lazy people in this area who prefer good pro grams to the...Bilges-water poured out by AM stations." El Cerrito. "Your programs...save American radio from being the greatest tragedy since Hamlet." Albany. "Enclosed please find $5 in coin for six months subscription to KPFA. We have been saving those in our piggy bank for a worthy cause which has finally come along. We greatly enjoy your programs and are looking forward to your program guide." Berkeley. "The whole subscription idea offers a glint of hope that radio might be beneficial to us yet." San Francisco. "This addressed to all those participating in the operation of your station. I should like to express my appreciation of the spirit and the aims and prin ciples of your station, and of the way in which they are being carried out. The type of material selected for broadcast, and the level of intelligence, of pro gram notes, commentary and news are nothing short of fine. Speaking as one for whom the worm of advertis ing and commercial bias has practically ruined radio, the absence of same in your programs is really of inestimable value to me as a listener. I have never heard radio like this in this country. What you are doing helps greatly to fill in a very essential and practically completely lacking activity in radio, and

23Ibid.. p. 55. 76 in my experience, there is a real hunger for such among many people." Berkeley. "I have had the good fortune to listen to most of your evening broadcasts since you came on the air, and wish to offer my congratulations on undertaking such a notable and desperately needed project. My imagination is stirred by the composition of your group, your ethical code, the shoestring nature of your finances and the creative tenor of the project. Berkeley.24 Public Affairs and Music drew the most mail in terms of numbers of letters, each having slightly more than 36 per cent of the- total tabulated during one period. Nearly all was favorable comment.25 Local newspapers took notice that there was some thing different in broadcasting. The San Francisco Chronicle was skeptical at first, but later became more enthusiastic in its evaluation: ...one of the most unusual radio experiments in the United States. It is KPFA-Interim, and it differs sharply in many ways from the standard pattern of what a radio station should be...KPFA has been broadcasting seven and one-half hours a day since Ap.?il 15» without benefit of one soap opera or a single commercial announcement. ...it is currently asking its listeners to become subscribers to a radio station....As conceived by Lewr.s Hill, one of KPFA's founders and now its general manager, a subscriber's relationship to the station is much like that of a reader to his favor.V-,e magazine. If he knows that a certain magazine consistently publishes material that he finds interesting to read, he will soon become a regular subscriber. If a listener finds out that

^Ibii,. p. 56-57. These comments are described as "random examples of letters from listeners."

25 Ibidt, p. 52* Voight. San Francisco Chronicle; see page 66. 77 KPFA is consistently presenting the kind of program that he prefers, he can assure its continuance with a subscription... The type and quality of program presented over KPFA is, of course, the means by which the station will either attract or not attract subscribers... what really distinguishes KPFA from the ordinary run-of-the-mill radio station is not the categories into which its programs fall, but their content and the manner in which they are presented. For instance, nearly 50 per cent of the station's programs are "live" productions...This is a high percentage by any local station standards... The station's philosophy is based on the belief that the radio audience is not a large anonymous mass of people in an auditorium, but one individual beside a speaker in his own home.27

Financial Difficulties of KPFA-Interim In view of the glowing tributes from the press and listener mail, one might assume that the station was a financial success. Actually, it was in financial difficulty from the very beginning, and lived from one crisis to another. Hill was constantly in search of funds. His letters are a steady stream of inquiries as to ''interest in our project", directed primarily toward those supporting causes of social reform or pacifism. Although the station, as it emerged on the air, had "live" performance of classical music as its dominant program fare, the station stressed much more heavily its devotion to the cause of reforming the world in its attempts to secure funds to finance its operation. The

27R. H. Hagan, "There is Something New in and on the Air in Berkeley," This World Magazine, in the San Francisco Sunday Chronicle, July 10, 1949. p. 22. 73 station started operation with funds sufficient to carry the operation for only three weeks.

Listener-Sponsorship The original idea of the station was an AM opera tion supported by commercial revenues. The excess in come from this operation was to be devoted to other projects related to the goals and purposes of the Foun dation, that is, pacifist causes. Very quickly in the operation of KPFA, two things became apparent. First, the kind of programming that was broadcast by KPFA was not going to produce substantial advertising revenue. It was not popular program fare, either with advertisers or listeners—at least, not popular enough to attract the size of audiences needed to successfully sell advertisers on the benefits of buying time for announcements on the station. Second, as was pointed out earlier, the tax exemption that was so essential to the securing of dona tions for further expanding the physical facilities of the station and underwriting the operating deficit de pended largely on a non-commercial type operation. The original application filed with the Internal Revenue Service, seeking this tax exemption as a non profit organization, promised that advertising would be accepted only until the station could be supported by 79 contributions from listeners, and that such revenues would be limited to the amounts necessary to operate the station without deficit. The IRS was very reluctant to grant tax exemption on this basis„ A later, revised statement to the IRS stipulated that no advertising would be accepted by the station, and that the total revenues would be from subscriptions and donationso ...it will be found that in actual operation, KPFA has based its operation entirely on the listener- subscription plan...and does not accept commercial advertising or otherwise sell broadcast time for commercial sponsorship. " Actually little effort had been made to secure commer cial sponsors, and no paid announcements were ever broadcast by the station. The only type of commercial announcements broadcast were of the "trade-out" type, for the building and in exchange for phonograph records. There is one signed contract in our files which was a product of the construction period. It is a contract with the owner of the office building in which we are located, and provides simply for a contract account against a certain period of build ing occupancy. Our service consists entirely in mentioning the building by name as a part of our station-break fifteen times per day. The contract runs only five weeks more. We have, in addition, an informal arrangement with a music store in Berkeley using their very

28Pacifica Foundation, Exemption Affidavit, Attach ment C, filed with United States Internal Revenue Service, August 23, 1948. 29Lewis Hill, letter to Commissioner, United States Internal Revenue Service, September 16, 1949. 30 large record library as we please and, in return, giving them a one-line credit once at the end of programs which use their records, which amounts to about three credits per day.30 In a lengthy letter to one of the original contributors to the station, Hill explained the basis for these decisions; An understanding of our present policy on adver tising and listener-subscriptions must begin with two of the most elementary of these factss that the Pacifica project never did raise the funds considered necessary for construction of a station and for it operating reserves and that to succeed at all it was and is imperative that KPFA be, from the radio lis tener's standpoint, so eminently superior to any other radio available that it can compel attention out of proportion to its size and signal range. The first of these two important facts meant that Pacifica had to go ahead and raise the capital re serve funds it lacked regardless of the means chosen for operating support of KPFA. When KPFA had been built, we had sufficient cash for exactly three weeks of operation. From those who feel that nothing should be attempted unless its security and success are certain in advance, the risk we took in building at all may receive condemnation. The fact is, however, that we have thus far been justified in this risk, in that the response which we expected would be stimulated by actual operation of KPFA has actually appeared, and has kept us on the air six months... With the task before us of raising the funds necessary for operation concurrently with actual operations, we had, as I am sure you can appreciate somewhat limited choices. It was obviously necessary to cut operating outlay, particularly staff, to a radical minimum. We did so. But at the same time, the second of the two basic facts I mentioned above remained. KPFA had to be radio of truly extraordin ary quality, but it had to operate with a budget and staff even smaller than those of the average small independent station. There entered here a factor of the economics of conventional broadcasting which is

•^Hill, letter to Norman E. Jorgenson, June 1$, 1949. 81 perhaps insufficiently understood. Any radio station has a budget, and the size of its budget determines the number of staff personnel it can employ to do whatever it proposes to do. Let us suppose that the average small independent with a budget like KPFA's can afford a maximum of ten staff members. Now, if it proposes to sell advertising, as every station does, it must first assign one of its staff positions to the supervision of sales and at least two more to the actual soliciting and servicing of accounts. In addition, a clerical staff of two will be indispensable to handle commercial continuity and the extensive accounting detail connected with commercial operation. The mere effort to sell advertising, wholly apart from its success, will account at once for half of the whole staff strength. The same station must, of course, have at least two technical engineers, and will usually combine these with individuals who also "spin" records and announce. It must also have its "manager", whose chief job is the maintenance of good relations with the Rotary Clubs, the American Legion posts, the City Hall, and above all the Merchants® Associations—vitally necessary to the sale of local advertising. With eight of its staff thus accounted for, the station has two left for what might be termed programming, for concentrating on what the station actually broadcasts, apart from its commercials. One of these remaining two is usually a harried person who bears the title Music Librarian, who doubles as a newscaster and is also under constant pressure to get out and sell an account or two himself. The other, and last, is the Program Director—the only person in the station, in reality, who has any time and any inclination to devote himself to the proposition that radio needs programs. With such a set-up, the most he can do, as a rule, is buy as many cheap "packaged" dis-jockey shows and transcription library fills as the station can afford, to fit in between the spot commercials. Once a week, perhaps, he rises above the situation to "produce" something. When you remark in your letter that you have always thought of radio broadcasting as a business to be run accord ingly, you are quite justified. But you must realize that this is the kind of business it is, and this is the way it is run. The consequence is, as you also know if you listen much to the radio, that creative radio programming, programming which is genuinely good not once a week but all the time, is quite rare. Even if the radio industry were full of creative and imaginitive people, which I am afraid it is not, the commercial exigencies g2 already described, the sheer physical facts of necess ary staff distribution would force a de-emphasis of programming. In contrasts, the only possible course for KPFA was to throw all its emphasis on the quality of pro grams. To do this, with a small staff, all of its staff members had to be essentially program employees.. the very fine beginning KPFA has made has depended entirely on its policy of concentrating the major energies of the staff on programming... Instead of diverting energy to advertising accounts (which, I am sure you are aware, would not have made the station self-supporting in this time either, and which would have left, still, the task we have been struggling with of raising capital funds), we have used this period to usher in our listener-subscription plan. We expect it will take two years, possibly less, to reach self-support on that basis. The real in auguration of the plan, from a promotional standpoint will occur this winter—we have been letting it grow like Topsy thus far; but even without the intensive promotion which of course we will give it, the sub scription volume has exceeded our projected quotas every month thus far. We have every confidence in the plan.31 Hill theorized that if only a small percentage of the listeners in a community supported a radio station, it could meet its expenses. But it would take time, and need external support until it could support itself. There is no precedent in radio economics for our listener-subscription plan; we cannot responsibly begin an operation aimed at that basis of support without providing in some way for the deficits which are bound to be incurred while the subscription plan is brought to bloom. At times he quoted several figures—1.5 and 2.5 per cent. Ultimately, he settled on 2 per cent as the optimum figure, which became the basis of his listener-subscription theory.

•^Hill, letter to George DeSilver, September 27,1949. 32Hill, letter to Norman E. Jorgenson, September 1, 194#. 83 If only 2 per cent of the available listeners would con tribute $10 each year to Pacifica, then the" project could be supported. But the demands of the IRS for assurances of non commercial operation before a ruling of tax exempt status could be granted, forced Pacifica to abandon these plans of temporary, limited commercial operation. Full energies were devoted to developing the concept of listener- sponsorship. KPFA has been on the air just a little more than five months, and it has chosen to use its early deficit operating period to begin building the listener-sponsorship plan instead of advertising accounts. I believe you will agree that it is extremely premature to judge that this decision was unjustified. I do feel free to say, in fact, that we have every hope the station will be fully suppor ted from listener subscriptions before two years have passed... You may remember that in the Pacifica Prospectus which discussed a commercial operation of KPFA, there was a period of deficit operation projected. The fund-raising goals of Pacifica... therefore included, always, a generous sum for operating reserves. I feel it is'.important to understand that Pacifica was never able to reach those goals before KPFA was built. Last January we decided to go ahead anyway, even though we had no money for deficit operations— believing that the attainment of the goals previously outlined depended on whether we were willing to "stick our necks out", and actually put a station on the air and show what it could do. The present financial crisis we wrote you about is thus entirely unrelated to the progress of the station itself, which has been greater than anyone dreamed? it is simply the old financial crisis... 33

•^Hill, letter to Mrs. Olga K. Robinson, September 26, 1949. 84 In spite of Hill's optimism that the financial problems would be resolved, the opposite occurred. The listener-subscription plan grew, but the income never caught up with the financial pressures. Hill's corres pondence shows the gradual increase in the severity of the crisis; in October, he wrote; ...It is of course the staff which in reality "weathers" the inevitable crises of these early days—salaries missed, personal debts brought on, general exhaustion on every hand...But the important thing is that every individual on the staff is engaged in an intensely personal activity. For this reason, the project has more or less indefinite stamina to make its own way. What we're hoping is that the financial situation won't become quite so extreme again. We need a thousand dollars at present to bring operating obligations to an entirely current status.. In November, Hill went to Chicago, attempting to raise funds there. John Lewis, Pacifica's treasurer, wrote to hims Cash balance is $115, and Gibbs is owed $2305 rent is due day after tomorrow; and Bronstein is hungry! So are we all.35 Eleven days later, after a notable lack of success in Chicago, Hill returned to Berkeley to a worsening situation. ...It has been some weeks since any of the staff has been paid, and as you know, none of these people is situated to coast very long without any money to pay the rent and feed the babies. The splendid commitment

•^Hill, letter to George Hogle, October 15, 1949. 35E. John Lewis, letter to Lewis Hill, November 13, 1949. 85 of the station's staff has had, and is having, the severest test. I am fearful that another week or ten days without relief in this circumstance may force the station off the air.3° The situation was no better a week later; It appears we have about run out of time. We have been obliged to go on the air with an announcement that next Wednesday, December 7» will find us unable to continue broadcasting unless a substantial change in our financial situation has occurred. The announcement is accompanied by an appeal—for the $5,000 necessary to see us through. But present limitation of our signal, I am very much afraid, affords no chance of raising $5,000 in seven days over the air except by the sheerest luck... It has not proved possible to put enough capital contribution resources together without tax exemption ...Tax exemption could conceivably spell the difference still. But it must come within the next week or at most ten days to be of any use at all.37 Fortunately, the tax exemption was granted that same week. This made a significant difference in securing donations. Today in Washington the Bureau of Internal Revenue issued its long awaited decision on Pacifica Founda tion's tax exemption. It was favorable. The project is exempted under Section 101 (6) of the Internal Revenue Code and of course donors are officially entitled to deduct contributions from their own taxable incomes.38 The group immediately embarked on a concentrated drive to raise money, devoting substantial air time to this purpose. Also, a letter was sent to everyone on the

^Hill, letter to Mr. Francis Heisler, November 25, 1949. •^Hill, letter to Norman E. Jorgenson, December 3» 1949. ^Hill, letter to Francis Heisler, December 1949. B6 station's mailing lists in the Bay area, dated December 1. Dear Friend, KPFA began a special fund-raising drive on the night of November 30, with the announcement that $5,000 must be raised by Wednesday, December 7> or the station will be forced to cease broadcasting. This emergency drive for funds is directed pri marily to the station's audience, and to all on San Francisco Bay who have come to value KPFA as a major contribution to the community life of the area. Since April, when KPFA went on the air, approxi mately $14,200 has been received from all sources for operation. An additional $5>000 has been pledged for operation of the station next year. Expenses of operation over the seven and one-half month period have been about $21,000. The external obligations of the station have not been permitted to become serious, but the station's staff has not been paid for eleven weeks, and an approaching point of exhaustion forced the present "all out" drive... If broadcasting is forced to stop on December 7 it will not necessarily spell the end of the Pacifica radio project. The officers and members of the Foundation will explore every possibility for pre serving the project's gains and carrying it further.39 Although the drive fell short of its goal, it did raise enough to give the group hope. The recent seven-day drive to raise $5,000 did not achieve that sum, but it did produce approximately $1,500 in small contributions from many listeners. We learned, much, and very quickly, about the meaning of KPFA to the hundreds of persons in the area... The experience has been immensely refreshing to the station's staff which has determined to stay on the air, extend the emergency drive another two weeks, and in general see the thing through.W It soon became apparent that the earlier growth of the number of FM receivers was over. It became increas-

^Hill, letter of December 1, 1949. ^Hill, letter to Dean Frank N. Freeman, December 9, 1949. 37 ingly difficult for those who wanted to listen to the station to find an FM receiver in any store. The number of independent FM stations—that is, those not merely duplicating an AM station's signal dwindled, lessening the attractiveness of FM as a medium. Hill increasingly looked at AM with longing but desperate thoughts: It is self-evident that, without funds for the slightest much less extensive promotional activity, we cannot fight the FM battle alone in"the Bay Area. It is also an increasingly pressing fact that the. persons and organizations from whom we seek (still) the basic funds needed to capitalize the project have great difficulty in attaining confidence in the future of FM. In brief, we are going to prepare an entirely new prospectus, combined with a report on the project's experience to date, which will set forth a plan to enter AM broadcasting through the purchase of exist ing facilities in the Bay Area. Then we are going to put the KPFA Sponsoring Group to work to raise a real budget, including the money necessary actually to subsidize operations for a while and actually to promote the listener-sponsorship plan on the large scale necessary. We are going to put the whole project on a this-or-nothing basis.41 And a week later: Ironically, I think our experience will demon strate that it is not so much the listener- subscription idea as the sale of FM itself that has desperately needed promotion to put the project over on its present basis. The approximate percentage of subscribers among listeners which I mentioned is not a testimony to the number of our subscribers, but indicates rather that there are probably not more than these thousand families capable of receiv ing KPFA's signal who have actually heard it. There is no doubt that the project must move into AM, and again, our experience goes far on its present

^Hill, letter to Norman E. Jorgensen, May 23, 1950 38 goals to prove the practicality of subscription radio if the audience is available.42 He explored the purchase of several existing AM stations, but purchase prices were beyond the group's most optimistic projections of what could be raised. A nighttime signal was essential, and any station already operating full-time had a high price. To buy a daytimer was risky, since there was little assurance nighttime operation could be authorized. If so, the present owners certainly could have been expected to have already se cured it, since this greatly enhanced the value of the station.

Sponsoring Group In the meantime,Hill had organized a "KPFA Spon soring Group", composed of a number of prominent citizens of the area. Initial contacts were made during December of 1949, describing the function of the group as follows: Our conception of a public sponsoring group is of the order of the "letter-head" committee, an evidence to the community at large of an established interest in the project and its range. There are many organizations I might instance the American Asso ciation of University Women, the PTA, the Junior League, the Berkeley Town Council, the Music Teachers' and Mental Health Associations which have asked that we outline for their boards of directors the plan of listener-sponsored radio, with a view to stimulating subscription support among their memberships. In developing KPFA we will of course pursue many such relationships and employ certain other familiar

^2Hill, letter to Norman E. Jorgensen, May 30, 1950. 39 methods of contacting individuals to many of whom the project may be new. It seems imperative that there should accompany such activities by our staff the recommendation of a body of prominent citizens. We are naturally not asking that these persons assume any degree or. kind of administrative burden. We seek, simply, a public endorsement... The basis on which we are seeking sponsorship is limited explicitly to these three functions, which I will summarize: (1) general "letterhead" endorse ment to aid the project's development of area interest in listener-sponsorship and in the kind of programming represented by KPFAj (2) joint endorsement of one or more applications by Pacifica Foundation to philan thropic foundations for grants covering KPFA's opera ting budget; (3) possible sponsorship of benefit music performances. It is understood that should any particular use of the committee's name be proposed beyond these limits, it would require the further agreement of every individual on the committee.^ Dean Frank Freemen, of the University of California, was appointed chairman of the group. It was this group that Hill expected to generate substantial support for any project to purchase an AM station. The station was originally conceived as a way to provide a substantial voice for the pacifist viewpoint. Many of the original contributions which made possible the building of the station were from those in the "peace- movement". In the early days much crucial assistance had had been given by the Friends Service Committee of San Francisco such as office quarters, access to duplicating equipment and typewriters.^ But on the whole, the station

^Hill, letter to Dean James Hagerty, December 15, 1949. ^Russell Jorgensen, interview with author, San Francisco, June 21, 1968. 90 received little help from this source beyond some initial contributions: In our experience with very few exceptions, organized pacificists have neither supported nor encouraged the project. A country-wide search did turn up enough donors to permit the plan's beginning on a small scale. It was begun with the hope that a period of actual operation on such a scale would allow it to complete its capitalization, expand its facili ties and achieve a self-supporting relationship with the metropolitan audience. KPFA-Interim has attracted wide attention? has many intensely loyal supporters and so forth, but it has never been able to raise enough money at one time to permit physical expansion. And in the meantime its uncovered operating expenses, for which, also, it has had no capital reserve, have created a deficit absorbed mainly by the staff which makes its continuance as a small-scale "demonstration" project wholly impossible.*+5 Interference Compounding all these problems was an extremely practical problem—that of an adequate, interference-free signal. In theory, the FCC operates to prevent inter ference between stations, or at least, keep it to the mini mum required for satisfactory listening in the city of license. KPFA had been assigned to a frequency of 100.1 mc. KNBC-fM, operating on 99.7 mc., about October 15,

1949f substantially increased the power of its signal, causing widespread interference to KPFA's signal. During the past week our offices have received numerous complaints from listeners within the city of Berkeley that KPFA cannot be received without interference from KNBC-FM. A check into several

^Hill, letter to A. J. Musto, Fellowship of Recon ciliation, July 23, 1950. The FOR is one of the larger pacifist groups. 91 score of these complaints has indicated that the receiving sets involved are not a factor. Prior to the recent power increase of KNBC-FM, no complaint of such interference had been received... A large audience is at present being deprived of the program service of KPFA in the area in which its signal, presumably, is to be protected. We will of course readily respond to any request for evidence of the listener complaints referred to, and we will appreciate your advice at your earliest convenience.^-0 Pacifica had intended to seek a Class B channel, i 7 which would permit greater power. ' But such an appli cation would require a demonstration of financial ability to construct the new facilities, and of course, Pacifica was in no position to do so. After their Washington attorney explained this difficulty really precluded the Class B application, it was decided to apply for a change to another Class A frequency to eliminate the interference. In view of the hazards now fully understood, we have decided to apply for a shift from one Class A channel to another without changes in the present CP. Since the expense of that shift will be at most $200 it is not necessary to file financial data.... We will bring our power up to 1 kw with the new antenna for the new channel, and thus, temporarily, achieve our purpose.... Not long ago I informed Slowie of the situation of intolerable interference created by KNBC-FM. He replied that the Commission would be able to process

i /T Hill, letter to Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, October 21, 1949. ^Class A channels are intended for local service, being limited to a maximum of three KW effective radiated power (e.r.p.). Class B and C channels are for much wider area service and are authorized to operate as high as 100 KW e.r.p. 92 an application rapidly. This of course was in refer ence to our intended Class B proposal.^" Once again, economic realities forced a less-than desirable decision. Pacifica applied for a change in frequency to 104.9 mc. January 3, 1950. The Commission approved the shift February 8, 1950, and it was accom plished March 7> 1950. A new six bay antenna, designed and constructed by Ed Meece, Chief Engineer, enabled the station to broadcast with its full authorized power of 1,000 watts. LQ Nevertheless, it must be noted that during a period of almost five months, the KPFA signal had been degraded by substantial interference from KNBC-FM. This, in turn, probably affected the degree of support available to the station through listener-subscriptions.

Termination of KPFA-Interim The financial problems grew progressively'worse during the summer of 1950. A survey of listeners con ducted with the co-operation of the University of Calif ornia, showed the 3°5 per cent of the potential FM i g Hill, letter to Norman Jorgensen, December 21, 1949. ZlQ Up to this time KPFA had been operating with 550 watts, e.r.p. by Special Temporary Authority of the FCC. The station continued to operate on the basis of a Con struction Permit, rather than a regular license, con tending it was preparing an application for a Class B channel. 93 audience were subscribers. But the total potential FM audience was small, and its rate of growth was decreasing. On July 26, 1950, the Executive Membership of Pacifica voted to terminate KPFA-Interim, effective Sunday, August 6, 1950. The station owed more than $2,000 in outstanding bills and $6895 in back salaries. Hill wrote to Jorgensens I am sorry to report that KPFA is going to have to shut down. The staff here for months has been absorbing salary expenses itself, but our exterior obligations have reached a point which threatens bankruptcy if we incur any more. We have no alter native under these circumstances...... As you are aware, it is the problem of capitali zation that we have never been able to solve and which fundamentally, requires the termination of this interim signal. I think it is quite important that this problem be understood in its separateness from the question of listener-sponsorship as a method of operating a culturally significant radio station. A recent poll here has shown that the percentage of subscription response in KPFA's primary signal area is amply, high (about 3.5$)...to support a station broadcasting to the entire metropolitan audience. KPFA's primary signal area, however, is very small. The station was built as a "preliminary, experi mental" facility, and its development of self- supporting subscriptions was dependent upon its constructing more powerful facilities...We have never been able to raise enough money at one time to permit such expansion.50 At the end of the broadcast day, August 6, 1950, the station signed off, to remain silent for more than nine months.

^Hill, letter to Norman Jorgensen, July 28, 1950. 94

B. SILENCE Although the station was now silent, members of the KPFA staff were by no means inactive. Relieved of the obligation of daily programming for the station, they now turned their energies toward fund-raising. Hill realized that if the station were ever to come back on the air, it must do so quickly, or the momentum would be lost. Worse, the staff would be scattered and unavailable. He also saw that a firmer financial base required a much wider distribution of the station's signal. Even before the station signed off the air, the announcement of its decision to suspend broadcasting triggered a movement among listeners to assist the station. August 3, a meeting at the Berkeley Unitarian Church to explore the situation drew more than 150 listeners, who contributed nearly $300 in cash and pledged more than $2300 toward putting the station back on the air.51 Nevertheless, the Executive Membership, at a special meeting August 6, decided "the financial picture had not changed materially since the decision [to suspend broadcasting]."^2 The group agreed the station could continue operation only when $40,100 had been raised or

^Pacifica Foundation, Minutes of the meeting of the Executive Membership, August 5, 1950. (hereinafter such minutes will be referred to as "Executive Member ship," followed by the appropriate date.) 52IMd. 95 pledged, including $4,000 in back salaries, $2,300 in current bills, $9,#00 to expand the station's signal, and a reserve of $24,000 to sustain operations for eight months. They also agreed to "weigh the pros and cons of returning to the air at any point...when substantial gain toward the goal was attained". 53 Hill was cautiously optimistic at the prospect of getting back on the air: In the past two weeks the audience of KPFA's small signal has risen with righteousness and zeal- Public meetings are being held, a citizens committee has been formed, the press of the area has become excited, and so forth. The tremendous amount of activity may certainly be said, I think, to contain some promise of putting KPFA back on the air with an expanded signal and a safe and secure operating subsidy.54- The San Francisco Chronicle, which had earlier expressed some pessimism about the station, now lamented the silence: Out of that approach grew a programming which won the station critical praise from many quarters. Its audience was small, but those who liked it couldn't get enough of it. A good many of its listeners were people who had given up listening to radio before KPFA came along... The station's listeners don't seem willing to let the idea die though...the almost devotional enthu siasm of the station's hard core of listeners. Their attitude was summed up by the chairman of their recent meeting, George Barati,, composer and conductor: "The Bay Area needs this station. We intend to

53Ibid. •^Hill, letter to Norman Jorgensen, August 9, 1950. 96 put it back on the air in a few months, and this time, we are going to keep it on the air.l,:? A four-page mimeographed statement of the station's goals, purposes, and needs was prepared for use at fund- raising events. It summarized the operation of KPFA- Interim: In its sixteen months, KPFA-Interim won nationwide recognition for the uniqueness of its programming and production methods...The station's accomplishments on the air demonstrated the feasibility of programming with small resources in a manner far exceeding the limits of conventional independent broadcasting. ...More than 40 per cent of the programming was "live" including continuous studio concerts of serious and folk music. Works of forty contemporary com posers received their first radio performances on KPFA-Interim. In sixteen months more than 2100 • persons participated in programs in the studios.-?c> The brochure explained the basic philosophy of the listener-sponsorship plan, reporting that 2.7 per cent of the FM audience within the Berkeley city limits were sub scribers to the station. Expanding this to the estimated 150,000 FM sets in the five-county metropolitan area of San Francisco, it was estimated that 4,000 subscriptions could bo attained at the 2.7 per cent rate, making the station self-supporting. To accomplish this, two things were needed: a better transmitter site and a more power ful transmitter.

^Bernard Taper, "A Radio Experiment Signs Off," This World Magazine, in the San Francisco Sunday Chronicle, August 13, 1950, p. 19. ^Pacifica Foundation, "The KPFA Campaign," Berkeley, California, undated, but obviously 1950, p. 1. 97 The proposal was to secure a site above the city to the east, on one of the mountain ridges there, and to purchase a 3,000 watt transmitter. This would, with a suitable antenna, produce about 15,000 watts of effective radiated power at sufficient height to provide a good signal to most of the Bay Area. The estimated cost of this proposal was $19,100. Funds contributed for this purpose were to be placed in a special account, to be returned in full if the station for any reason did not undertake the expansion program. In addition, the station sought an amount of $24,000 as an operating subsidy for the first eight months of broadcasting. The KPFA Sponsoring group, established during the previous winter, became quite active in the effort to put the station back on the air. In now numbered more than thirty persons, carefully chosen to represent community leaders in both civic and educational circles. For the educators, August was an ideal month, ior many were available to devote their full energies to this cause. The Sponsoring Group set up a special Campaign Committee, headed by Dr. Raymond Cope, minister of the Berkeley First Unitarian Church. Under the direction of this committee, local volunteer committees were formed in San Mateo, Palo Alto, San Francisco, Marin County, 57 Oakland, Berkeley and El Cerrito. The actual campaign

^Pacifica Foundation, "KPFAs A Survey of Its Past and Future, " Berkeley, California, January, '1951, p. 11 • 93 began late in October with more than 250 volunteers soli citing pledges and donations to put KPFA back on the air. By December, $23>000 had been raised, more than half the goal, and more than a thousand pledges of subscriptions had been secured. In the meantime, Hill had been investigating the least expensive method for increasing the station's power. He wrote to all the major manufacturers of transmitting equipment, inquiring about the likelihood of their being interested in donating a transmitter to the station. The letter went to six different manufacturers. Although none offered the outright gift of a transmitter, the Raytheon Company offered to donate the parts for such a transmitter if Pacifica were willing to pay the cost of assembly and tuning, as well as the freight to the West Coast. 59 Since it was the best offer Pacifica had, con siderably below the normal cost of such a transmitter, it was accepted when the group decided to put the station back on the air. The other necessity was a better transmitting site. The Interim station had transmitted from the roof of an office building in downtown Berkeley. FM signals, being

5$ Hill, letter to E. J. Rome, Raytheon Company, August 1&, 1950. J. Rome, letter to Lewis Hill, September 15, 1950. 99 "line-of-sight" radio waves, are most effectively trans mitted from tall towers of high antenna sites. Another local FM station had an excellent site near Grizzley Peak overlooking Berkeley, and providing the height necessary to broadcast into San Francisco and other communities across the Bay. Hill had held several discussions with the owners of this site about a joint use of the site for the antennas of both stations, or common use of one antenna even before the Interim station had left the air. However, since the other station, KSFH, was also in financial difficulty, these discussions were dropped. As the financial campaign began to be promising, the search for an adequate site became more intensified. In all, eight different sites were considered, and the engineering staff made field measurements from all of them. Finally, a temporary site was leased from the city of Oakland, just south of the Berkeley city limits. With a 105-foot tower, it gave an antenna height above sea level of 1,2&5 feet.^ The Campaign for funds during the fall was reason ably successful, raising more than half of the goal, as has been noted before. A spring campaign was planned to raise the remainder of the funds and to secure the

£r\ Pacifica Foundation, Application for Construction Permit filed with FCC on behalf of station KPFA, March 22, 1951, FCC file number BMPH-43^5. 100 additional 2,000 subscribers necessary to make the station self-supporting. In February, 1951» the directors discussed the advisability of returning to the air before launching this campaign. Most thought it desirable for two reasons? First, it was increasingly evident that it would be diffi cult to hold the staff together through the summer unless the station returned to the air. Second, it was felt it would make the campaign more effective if the station were on the air.• 61 Although the records do not indicate a formal decision to return to the air, on March 22, 1951» an application for a Construction Permit was filed with the FCC, specifying operation on 104.9 mc. (a Class B channel) with an effective radiated power of 16.1 KW on the site described above. The costs of construction were estimated at $3>650 for the transmitter and antenna. Assets were listed as $6,432 in bank deposits and $3*454 in pledges. By April 11, 1951S. it is clear that the decision to proceed had been made, although the FCC had not yet issued a Construction Permit;

Pacifica Foundation, Minutes of the meeting of the Committee of Directors, February 21, 1951• (Herein after referred to as "Committee of Directors," followed by the appropriate date.) Pacifica, Application for Construction Permit, March 22, 1951. 101 KPFA's application for permission to operate with its expanded signal is in the hands of the Federal Communications Commission. Approval by that body is expected at an early date...Volunteer work crews of pick & shovel men, carpenters, audio engineers and rig & tackle experts are standing by, eager to pitch in and get the small transmitter house built, and the 8-bay antenna hoisted aloft.°3 Within a week, the Construction Permit was issued, but specifying 104-5 mc. rather than the channel that had been sought (104.9). Construction began immediately at the transmitter site. fil Why did so many people work so hard to put KPFA back on the air? The answer lies in the fact that in its brief Interim operation, the station had attracted the attention of many people of influence in the community. The station had sought out many of these persons to par ticipate in its public affairs programs—discussions, round tables, and forums. The musical community had been actively engaged in the various programs of live music programmed by the station. In all, more than two thousand persons had participated in studio productions in the sixteen months of KPFA-Interim.65 While at the station, these people had often asked about its purposes, goals, and programming. Many returned home determined

^Ida Mae Zapf, letter to volunteer workers, April 11, 1951• Mrs. Zapf was General Campaign Co ordinator for Pacifica. ^Executive Membership, April 30, 1951. ^"The KPFA Campaign,',' p. 3« 102 to listen, and became loyal supporters. Hill touched on a more philosophic motive in a letter to his father: The reasons for which the project is so important to so many people are naturally varied. Probably the salient thing is the station's function in Public Affairs programming. In the admissability of heresies and the absence of philosophical censorship there has been nothing like it in American radio, and we have found that the public hunger for a frank speaking out, a radical ethical confrontation of major issues, greatly exceeds the public dispepsia. A more general fact about the project, its complete independence, shores up the confidence and respect this kind of activity requires. The donors, the prestigious committees, etc., have nothing to do with its policy controls they have not sought control, and there has been no compromise with the advent of their more active assistance. The public support which enabled the station to return to the air was not a spontaneous reaction of the listeners. It had been carefully nourished and organized, primarily by Lewis Hill. Nevertheless, the support was substantial enough to permit the station to return to the air with a stronger signal, a better transmitter site, and renewed hope.

C. THE RENEWED KPFA KPFA returned to the air May 19, 1951> using the new transmitting facilities but the same studios that had been used for KPFA-Interim. The station had about 1200 subscribers at this time. Simultaneously with the

AS Hill, letter to Johnson D. Hill (his father), spring of 1951. 103 resumption of broadcasting, the Spring Campaign was launched, with the goal of securing an additional 2,000 Cjrj subscribers to make the station self-supporting. Programming In most respects, the programming of KPFA was very- much the same as that of the Interim operation. The four broad categories of programming remained: Music, Drama, Public Affairs, and Children's. Several months prior to leaving the air, the station had begun the rebroadcasting of selected programs during weekday mornings. This was continued. From 7:00 to 10:00 a.m. each morning, the better and more popular programs were rebroadcast for the benefit of listeners who did not hear the earlier original trans mission. This practice of rebroadcasting programming survives today at all the Pacifica stations, although it is not limited to morning hours. The station's schedule at the time it returned to the air totaled fifty-seven hours a week: from 7:00 to 10:00 a.m. and 4:30 to 10:30 p.m. on weekdays. On Saturdays and Sundays, the station broadcast from 3:00 to 6:00 in the afternoons and 7:30 to 10:30 in the even ings. These hours were unchanged for the next eight months

^KPFA Program Folio, II, (May 18, 1950), p. 1. (Hereinafter referred to as Folio). 104 The original program proposals had called for comprehensive news programming. When it was decided to begin the Interim operation on a reduced basis, the scope of the news programming originally envisioned was substan tially reduced. Instead of the three newswire services Hill thought necessary for comprehensive news program ming p only one. International News Service, was contract- 6$ ed. Even this proved too costly for the station, and its use was discontinued after nine months.69 As a result, the news programming of the station consisted more in analysis of current trends rather than up-to-the- minute coverage of events. Most of the individuals involved in the project held deep feelings about freedom of speech, especially as it applied to access to the mass media. Most, being pacifists, resented the fact that the networks rarely allowed anyone with pacifistic views to participate in radio programming. Out of this grew the commitment to keep KPFA open to the expression of all viewpoints. The various types of discussion and forum programs

6$ At that time, there were three national news wire services: INS, UP, and AP. Later UP and INS were merged to form UPI. 69The discontinuance resulted in much correspon dence between attorneys for KPFA and INS. Apparently the New York Office of INS was not willing to cancel the contract on the basis agreed to by Hill and the West Coast INS representative. 105 scheduled by the station, described earlier, provided a vigorous analysis of many viewpoints—popular and unpopular. During the Interim operation, there had been at least five such programs each week. This schedule was maintained when the station returned to the air in 1951. Also inaugurated early in the Interim period was a series called "Commentator's Series". Scheduled five times a week, this program presented five different persons through the week with the views of each on public events. At first staff members participated, but soon the series was presenting four persons who were not otherwise involved with the station. At the time the first Folio was published (eight weeks after the station started) the commentators were Clarence Rust, Thomas Parkinson, Gordon Haskell, Fred Fredman, and Robert Schutz. Of these, only Schutz had any other connection with the station—he also conducted a discussion program , although he was not a full-time staff member. This group of commentators reflected a diverse group of opinions and philosophies, from the conserva tive to liberal, and from defenders of the economic status quo to socialist. The second Folio discussed the station's approach to public affairs: Every public issue has more than two sides. And somewhere among the many shades of opinion is to be found an approach that represents the best possible solution. Sound public policy can be developed only when we have the freedom to hear all these 106 ideas presented-in the presence of their opposing ideas. Only in this way are issues sharpened, propaganda exposed. KPFA is endeavoring to make just this type of approach to public affairs. Through the use of differing program formats, by raising "embarrassing" issues, by enlisting the cooperation of able speakers of all shades of opinion, and above all, by giving public affairs favorable listening hours—by all these means, KPFA is endeavoring to become the source of the area's most continuous and incisive examination of public affairs.70 The "Commentator's Series" was included in the program schedule of the station when it returned to the air in 1951. However, of the original group of commen tators, only Clarence Rust returned to the air immedi ately, although Bob Schutz returned to the series within several months. Hill himself took the Friday night spot on the series, usually discussing some aspect of station opera tion. These talks, called "Report to Listeners", ranged from programming policies to the financial status of the station.

Programming Philosophy As the station returned to the air by means of a broad community-based support, its basic objectives began to undergo gradual modification. As has been discussed earlier, the original basis for the station was to provide for the expression of the pacifistic view-

7°Folio, I, (June 19, 1949), p. 1. 107 point within the structure of excellent programming. We have seen that one of the key features, comprehensive news programming failed to materialize, for economic reasons. Another casualty of the small staff and limited budget were dramatic programs, although some excellent drama from the BBC was aired. On the other hand, the music programming of the station was extremely successful, assuming much more emphasis in the station's total programming than originally planned. To a certain extent, live music programming was deliberately promoted to emphasize the superior quality of the FM medium, but the total emphasis this programming received must be attributed to the failure of the news and drama programming, as well as the positive response on the part of the listeners to the high quality music programming the station presented. The Children's programming also was well accepted. It tended to concentrate on educational values such as basic music ("Instruments in the Orchestra")* science ("Stars in Our Heaven"), legends and fairy tales, and creative activities. It should be observed that at the time the major networks were offering fare such as "Jack Armstrong, the All-American Boy", "Superman", and "Straight Arrow". 71

"^Harrison B. Summers, Radio Programs Carried on National Networks (Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University, undated), p. 181. 108 Nevertheless, it was in public affairs program ming that KPFA excelled. The station emphasized the intellectual depth of its treatment of issues, as well as the availability of such programs at times when most people could listen. This was in strong contrast to the practices of the national networks, which in the 1951-52 season scheduled only eleven public affairs programs, and only one of these between the hours of 7:00 and 10:00 p.m. 72 In addition, many local stations regularly pre-empted these programs to carry local or syndicated programs with greater entertainment value. 73 As the public affairs area of the station's programming received more emphasis, the expressed philo sophy of the station became more pronounced in its em phasis on individual freedoms and the necessity for full discussion of public issues. The first prospectus had emphasized free and open discussion as a requisite to a functioning democracy. Several Folio articles from the 1951-52 season spelled out much more explicitly the station's view on keeping the public informed: The word "responsibility" is one which is used very frequently at KPFA. The reason is that we feel the individual is in a responsible position in his society, and the more programs we put on the

72Ibid., p. 189. 7^See the discussion of this point in FCC, "Public Service Responsibility of Broadcast Licensees," Wash ington, March 7, 1949» Part II, A (7)J Part III, C. 109 air,, the more we discover that the assumptions. as to the remoteness and complexities of state are illusions. The danger of furthering such assump tions need hardly be emphasized. One is either in a world where his own interests and value judg ments are applicable or he is in a world where events take place as in an inexplicable and terri fying dream. It's not the "news behind the news", but what the individual does that counts. The radio listener is accousted in his privacy. The event between himself and his loudspeaker is a direct and individual communication, even if no one meant it to be. The basic event is a relationship with the listener brought about by the person broadcasting, who engages in a communicative act... The proper object of public affairs and news activities is taken to be a clarification and enrich ment of practical human relations. That object is defeated when the listener is valued not in his individuality but in his quantative extension of a mass norm...Radio concerned with the single listener bestows genuine feeling of inquiry. Where the integrity of the act of broadcasting is the first criterion, a complete and uncompromising utterance of individual views is not only possible, but necessary...The aims of the Pacifica project may be summarized...First, to increase the capacities of the individual for creative participation in his own culture. Second, to enlarge the base of public opinion which will support ethically oriented public policies.'5 One of the commonest frustrations in American life is our inability to talk back to the radio... the Broadcaster will point to his ratings to prove we're getting what we want...But there is one way this circle of frustration can be...broken. It consists of someone deciding that there are good things which should be broadcast for their own sake...simply because they are valuable in them selves. [italics in the original.JVO About this time, Hill discussed public affairs programming in a "Report to Listeners" broadcast, in

7ZfFolio, II (December 2, 1951), p. 12. 75Folio, II (March 9, 1952), p. 12. 76Folio, II (April 6, 1952), p. 12. 110 response to a letter from a listener: We feel critically responsible for broadcasting things which would justify the full attention of the listener, should he ...feel inclined to turn it there...It is indispensible that somewhere in this world something be done for its own sake. In radio it is always the same storys the broadcaster pleads that he can't change his programming for the better because the mass wants what he is doing. The mass has no suggestion for the better because all it knows is what it is getting. Nowhere in this endless circle does someone, valuing something, do it for its own sake. Perhaps the same analogue touches on the extremes of our whole external and internal crisis. I can't do anything, I can't change until the others—those other people—change.... Where in the whole welter of expediency, opportunism, ...can we get our hands on the possibility of doing something good because it is good, simply because it is good, regardless of its expediency? We don't know what is good, but we aspire to know it. We don't wish or intend to ignore the expedien cies of operating a radio station, but we hold those second, not first. From a philosophical standpoint, we feel that the health of society may be improved, and cannot possibly be harmed, by the existence of at least one radio station that acts, to the best of its ability, on significance rather than con venience, and actually seeks to serve rather than exploit.77 The station's programs sought out those who were controversial in the issues of the time. During a two- week period in the fall of 1952, the station presented two highly controversial speakers. Harry Bridges, head of the Longshoreman's union frequently had been accused of close ties to the Communist party. The other, Assemblyman Harold K. Levering, proposed a state constitu tional amendment providing for a loyalty oath for all

^Lewis Hill, "Report to Listeners," radio broad cast, KPFA, Berkeley, California, January 11, 1952. Ill state employees. Of these speakers the Folio stated? Within this Folio period there are programs permitting the expression of a number of widely divergent points of view—those of Harry Bridges and Harold K. Levering, for example. Many times, KPFA has been asked why we permit such and such a person (usually someone representing a minority point of view) to speak over the air. The answer is that if freedom of speech is to have any meaning at all, the station's first responsibility is to develop and maintain in its programming the condi tions under which reason and informed judgment can operate. This in turn is dependent upon a willing ness and a determination to seek out and present both majority and minority points of view, so that the listener may at least have the opportunity for independent judgment. Suppression of free speech is the commonest form of thought control.78

Financial The Spring Campaign was a failure. The goal of two thousand new subscriptions that had been announced when the station returned to the air was not reached. In fact, by October, only eight per cent, or 160 new subscriptions, had been secured.79 By the summer of 1951, the financial situation of the station was once again dim. Except for the fact that the station had managed to meet its payroll more often than not, the situation approached the kind of crisis that had forced it off the air the previous summer. In August, Hill wrote a bleak memorandum to the staff:

7^Folio, III (October 5, 1952), p. 1. ^Folio, II (October 7? 1951)» p. 1. 112 The flow of subscriptions over the past two weeks has declined to about 30 per week. There remain about 300 old pledges still unpaid, and it is clear that whatever balance of those is yet to be paid will not be in our hands until Fall, when the pled gors return from vacations to read our notices... It isn't likely that the flow of new subscriptions can be increased until Summer is over and campaign activity more practical. After salary checks were issued today, our bank balance was $7^5.40. There will be a sufficient balance for salaries next week, but the week follow-^- ing that is obviously in question as of this moment. u The memorandum asked for suggestions from the staff as to any way to ease the financial pressures, and discussed a few hopes for support from various foundations, including the following: Robert Hudson, in charge of Adult Education activities for the Ford Foundation, is supposed to visit KPFA during August, after a fairly elaborate development of interest through Milton Mayer. Hudson wants to look at the project first-hand. The plan is to present an application to Ford immediately thereafter."! Hill's memo was prophetic. The financial situa tion, as far as income from subscribers, did not change for several months. But the support of the Ford Foun dation, through the Fund for Adult Education, did materialize—in time to save the station from financial disaster.

An Hill, Memorandum to KPFA Staff, August 3? 1951. CHAPTER V

FINANCIAL STABILITY UNDER THE GRANT FROM THE FUND FOR ADULT EDUCATION, 1951-1955.

In 1936, Henry Ford established the Ford Foundation by contributing a small portion of the stock in the Ford Motors Corporation. According to the Foundation's charger, its purpose is "to advance human welfare."1 Today, the assets of the Ford Foundation are estimated in excess of 3*5 billion dollars. 2 Its acti vities have embraced nearly every aspect of American life, such as aiding educational television, local schools, and higher education, as well as training of technicians and teachers and aiding minority groups. Periodically throughout its history, the Board of Trustees of the Foundation has created a separate sub ordinate agency to carry out a specific program. The Fund for Adult Education was such an agency, formed to investigate different ways of continuing the education

"^"Reserve Bank for Big Ideas, Little Ideas, and Oddball Ideas," Life, June 9, 1967, p. 64. ^"Look Who's Talking}" Fortune, August, 1967» p. 176. 113 114 of adults after their formal schooling had ended. It was only natural that such an agency should become interested in Pacifica and KPFA, with its heavily cultural and issue- oriented programming, as well as its unique method of listener-sponsorship support.

The Application to the Fund for Adult Education As indicated earlier, the subject of FAE support for KPFA was originally discussed with officials of the Fund by Milton Mayer, during the early summer months of 1951- Mayer had been an administrative assistant to Robert Hutchins during his presidency at the University of Chicago. Hutchins was new associate director of the Ford Foundation. In August of 1951, Hill made the initial written proposal for support by the FAE in a four-page letter to Robert Hudson, Director of Broadcasting at the University of Illinois, a member of the board of the FAE. Hill proposed a grant with two objects: (1) to obtain a subsidy for operations until self-support from subscrip tions was reached, and (2) to provide a special fund for promotional activity to secure new subscriptions. The subsidy was proposed on a diminishing scale over a twenty-four month period. Hill also proposed an imme diate grant of $7jS00 for three months' operation, while the final form of the project was formulated with the 115 assistance of the staff of the FAE. 3 Hudson made recommendations on the initial pro posal and forwarded it to the headquarters of the FAE in Pasadena, California. After consultation with several of the officers of the FAE„ principally Scott Fletcher, President, a more formal and detailed application was submitted August 29, 1951. It also proposed the temporary subsidy of $7,$00, as well as three alternative proposals for support over a three year period, ranging from mini mal support to the optimum proposal of AM-FM operation.^4" Hill summarized the station's programming: We are scarcely satisfied with KPFA's present programming? it would be fair to say only, I think, that its level is generally far enough above that of commercial radio, and its subject matter suffi ciently unique, to have given a sound rationale for listener-sponsorship. The station's programs pro vide a laboratory example of what is possible with extraordinarily small material resources...5 The object of the proposals was to determine whether listener-sponsored radio, as a self-supporting plan of independent radio operation in metropolitan areas,is practical.6

^Letter from Lewis Hill to Robert Hudson, August 20, 1951. ^"Letter from Lewis Hill to Scott Fletcher, August 29, 1951. 5Ibid. ^Letter from Lewis Hill to Scott Fletcher, August 31i 1951. 116 At the time, the FAE was very interested in the establishment of a stable NAEB tape network. The over whelming problem had been the securing of programs of adequate quality for distribution on the network. Hill's covering letter devoted more than a page in describing the kind of discussions that had taken place during the past month with the head of the NAEB tape network, re lating to the part KPFA could play in aiding the network. Our own tentative plan, subject to the clarifica tion of KPFA's immediate future, has been to offer Mr. Rider [head of the NAEB tape network] at once nine regular program series for distribution on the network.7 The conclusion was obvious: by supporting KPFA, the FAE could aid another of its projects, the NAEB tape network. The application essentially proposed three alter natives for subsidizing the station. The first was to support KPFA at the present level for three years, without materially increasing its coverage or its programming capabilities. The second was to increase the station's power and enlarge its studio facilities. The third alternative proposed the purchase of AM facilities to be operated jointly with KPFA. The first proposal totaled $77,000; the second, Sill,500; and the third, $332,929.

7Ibid. 117 The officers of the FAE responded on September 5, less than a week later, by immediately authorizing the initial grant of $7,800 for a three-month subsidy. After discussions with FAE officials, a proposal was formulated that provided more support than either of Hill's first two earlier proposals, but excluded the development of a joint AM-FM operation. The total proposed grant was slightly more than $150,000, to be divided into two parts: the improvement of studio and transmission facilities, and operating subsidies on a decreasing scale over a three-year period. The FAE staff summary of the proposal listed the objective "to determine whether a metropolitan radio station broadcasting unusual adult programming can exist without advertising, but derive adequate income g instead from annual listener-subscriptions." The specific recommendation developed by the FAE staff was for a grant providing $84,315 the first year, $42,048 the second year and $24,546 in the final year of the project. Provision was made for review and recon sideration at the end of the first and second year. The grant was approved October 16, 1951.

Improved Facilities Part of the proposal was predicated on an extra

ct R. 3. Pettingil, "FAE Staff Summary of Pacifica Foundation Proposal," September 28, 1951, (in KPFA files). 118 ordinary opportunity that had presented itself to Pacifica in August. Another FM station, KSFH, had operated in Berkeley for several years, on a commercial basis, but it had not been a financial success. It was currently in the hands of attorneys representing the major creditors, who were seeking to salvage some value from the assets. The transmitter site contained four acres of land, a transmitter house, a 250-foot tower with FM antenna, and a 3 KW transmitter. Obviously, these assets were of value only to persons wishing to operate an FM station in Berkeley, and all efforts to find a buyer for the complete station had failed. One of the attorneys for the credit ors, being a KPFA subscriber, knew that the transmitting site KPFA was then using had been leased for a three- year period as a temporary measure, and so approached Hill with the idea that Pacifica buy the KSFH trans mitting site. In view of the necessity to find a permanent transmitting site, Hill was very interested.9 The property was offered at the cost of payments to creditors, $16,000, which was less than one-third its replacement value. The purchase of this transmitter site had been

Q In 1950, Hill had proposed using the site joint ly with KSFH, but agreement between the two stations was not reached. The financial instability of KSFH made Hill reluctant to become involved, and the temporary site was leased. See letters from Lewis Hill to Charles A. Gibson, President, Pacific Broadcasting, August 3 and 11, 1950. 119 proposed and approved as a part of the FAE grant, but the resolution of legal problems among the creditors, Pacifica, and attorneys representing the FAE delayed the completion of the transaction. Before the final details had been worked out, during the first week of December, a minor disaster struck—a windstorm felled the tower and antenna at the temporary site then in use. It was manifestly impractical to make a new per manent installation on the old site...because we planned to move from there anyway. This meant that we had to complete the purchase of the new trans mitting site as soon as possible.. The original plan had been to construct a new tower. With the station off the air, the need was to resume broadcasting as soon as possible. Application to the FCC for a power increase to 52 KW with transmitter and antenna located at the new site was hurriedly completed and filed, accompanied by a request for Special Temporary Authority (STA) to operate with reduced power from that proposed, using the frequency on which KSFH had broadcast. In this way, the old KSFH transmitter and antenna, still on the new site and included in the purchase, could be used to put the station back on the air. The application, filed November 27, 1951» was acted upon with unusual speed by the FCC, the STA being approved December 1$, 1951. The station was back on the air within days with a power of

^KPFA Program Folio, Vol. II, No. 20 (January 23, 1952)^ p. 12. 120 15.3 KW, on a frequency of 94.1 mc. Later, Pacifica then filed an amendment to its original application to request permanent assignment of the 94.1 frequency, and the FCC approved the application on this basis in February, 1952. A used 10 KW transmitter was purchased and installed at the new site. Using the old KSFH antenna and tower, this produced 52 KW effective radiated power (erp.). The antenna was 1330 feet above sea level, mounted on a 250- foot tower in the mountains just east of the city of Berkeley. Operation with increased power was begun May 19? 1951.11 This is the site and approximate poxver in use to the present by station KPFA. Its 1 mv/m con tour is shown in Figure 1. Another change in facilities made possible through the FAE grant was the move to new studios. The station had been paying $275 a month for their old sixth-floor location of 1300 square feet. Since the transmitter was no longer located there, the height became more of a disadvantage than an advantage to the station. Hill found second-floor space in downtown Berkeley that could be rented for $200 a month, although it had 5?000 square feet, nearly four times that in the old location. Approx imately $6,700 was spent converting the new space to

"^"Report to Listeners," broadcast by KPFA, May 19» 1952, (in KPFA files). 121 Sacramento

Petaluma o

Stocktoi

mOakland San Francisco

Pacific Modesto o Ocean

Palo Alto

FIGURE 1 MAP SHOWING 1 mv/mile CONTOUR OF KPFA, BERKELEY 122 radio studios. The move was made during December, 1951 > while the station was off the air. To equip the new facility, studio equipment with a total cost of $3»500 and office equipment costing nearly $2,000 was purchased,, Finally, a grand piano was purchased for use in musical concerts. 12 The effect of these expenditures was that for the first time, KPFA had a thoroughly professional operating facility. No longer were the discussion programs con ducted to the background of musicians warming up in the next room. Nor was it necessary to take four or five minutes between programs while the studio was re-set. Of most importance, the station could apply for a per manent license, since its equipment was now of sufficient quality to pass proof-of-performance tests required by the FCC. Prior to this move, KPFA had operated on the basis of a Construction Permit (CP) or Special Temporary Authority (STA) of one kind or another since 1949• On May 2&, 1953> the FCC granted KPFA its first station license.

AM Facilities One of the three proposals Hill submitted to the FAE included a joint AM-FM operation. Hill pointed out

12Report to the Fund for Adult Education, Septem ber 20, 1952, (Berkeley! Pacifica Foundation, 1952), p. 20 (mimeographed). 123 that less than 20 per cent of the homes in the Bay Area possessed FM receivers. He was still convinced that his plan of listener-sponsored radio could be effective only if it had a large potential audience, and that this audience would only be available through AM stations for quite some time. He had followed developments on the AM scene closely ever since the Richmond application had been turned down. He bitterly saw AM stations sold at exhor- bitant profits, just for the value of the license, to be used for maximum commercial profit, with little or no thought to any real meaning of "public interest". The last usable AM frequency in San Francisco had been assigned, but the licensee on various pretexts, had never constructed a station. Hill stated that informally, the licensee had offered to sell the Construction Permit for an arrangement that obviously was quite profitable, which would be in violation of FCC regulations. Much correspondence between Hill and KPFA's Washington attorney concerned how the FCC might be made to see the true character of this licensee, in order that the frequency might be re-assigned to Pacifica. The effort, whether successful or not, would have required a costly legal battle, and in spite of Pacifica's press ing need for an AM frequency, they did not have sufficient resources for such an undertaking. 124 Hill brought this matter to the attention of various FAE officials at several times, but to no avail. They were committed to the project through FM facilities. Their close identification with the NAEB project which involved mainly FM stations may have influenced their decision. At any rate, Hill was not successful in interesting the FAE in helping KPFA secure AM facilities.

The Theory of the Experiment The FAE Project at KPFA was to be a test of the concept of a listener-supported radio station. Hill theorized that subscription response of two per cent of the potential audience would produce an adequate income to make the station self-supporting.13 An integral part of the experiment was the assumption that such a radio station would have to provide programming of a highly specialized nature—not available from other sources. Inherent in this specialization was the programming freedom possible under such a system free of the dictates of sponsors, owners, or institutions supporting other radio stations, commercial or non-commercial."*"4 As has been seen, an integral part of the experiment was the expansion of the signal to cover the entire

"^Lewis Hill, Voluntary Listener-Sponsorship, (Berkeley? Pacifica Foundation, 1958), p. 2. 14Ibid. 125 San Francisco metropolitan area, and improving its pro gram production facilities. Also included was a budget for systematic promotion of KPFA using various forms of mass media, as well as other promotional media. These included newspaper advertisements, advertisements and flyers in programs of various cultural events, direct telephone solicitations, and direct mail, in addition to the volunteer solicitation and on-the-air promotions previously used. Hill described the FAE grant in a "Report to Listeners"i KPFA was not designed to be, and does not intend to be, a project whose operation depends upon regu lar gifts from philanthropic sources. It intends to be a radio project whose operation is supported entirely by the radio audience, by subscriptions. It intends to prove that such an operation is feasible, that a great metropolitan audience like that of the Bay Area will support non-commercial radio. When that has been completely demonstrated— ...when KPFA has finally obtained the number of subscribers required for its self-support—the significance of the experiment will extend far beyond the San Francisco region...What is in question is whether it is a workable plan. The Ford Foundation wants to find out5 and so do we... We have been given a chance to show that listener- sponsorship will work.15 Clearly, the basis of the FAE project at KPFA was to show that listener-sponsorship would work. In analyzing the theory underlying the operation of KPFA, four basic points emerge. First, the subscrip-

"'"^Lewis Hill, "Report to Listeners," broadcast by KPFA August 7, 1951, (in KPFA files). tion is entirely voluntary. The program service of the station is available to all who wish to listen—a requisite for being licensed as a broadcasting station.16 The receipt of subscriptions by the station depends on the voluntary decision of the listener to support the station. It is not a donation, nor a membership due, but instead a payment for services which were made available to the subscriber. Second, the subscription conferred a liability on the station to provide program services for the term of the subscription, or failing this, to return a pro-rated portion of the subscription. Third, the program services to be provided in this case were of a specific, clearly defined nature. An essential part of this definition was that the services would be non-commercial—free from restrictive influences of sponsors, advertising agencies, or advertising motives Implicit here was the promise to make programming de cisions based on what should be heard, in the best collective judgments of the staff, rather than what would be popular or secure a high "rating". Fourth, the programming would be of a specialized nature, designed to make available that not otherwise

1 f\The term "broadcasting" is legally defined as "the dissemination of radio communications intended to be received by the public," in the Communications Act of 1934, Section 3., 127 availableo Of necessity, much of this programming would be designed for minority audiences, and not every thing in the program schedule would interest every listener. Free from the requirement to show the largest possible audience in every time segment in order to attract sufficient sponsors, the station could serve needs of significant groups that were unprofitable in terms of commercial radio. It would seem contradictory that an audience could be expected to pay for something they could receive without paying. However, such an assumption ignores the high moral obligation stressed by the station and the devotion of its minority of listeners to the cause of KPFA. Hill describes this apparent contradiction: Actually, the principles upon which KPFA was founded only appear to contradict these "facts of life". The actual experience of KPFA has proven these facts to be somewhere around 98 per cent correct—more true, indeed, than any generality on social character has ever been shown to be. It is the 2 per cent THAT DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE FACTS THAT IS IMPORTANT. Every cherished assump tion about the character of the American audience can be left intact, but there is still a tiny ^7 fractional margin to explore for practical results.

17Lewis Hill, as quoted by Eleanor McKinney, "KPFA History," (in KPFA files, typewritten, undated), p. 9. The quotation apparently is taken from an early draft of the book, Voluntary Listener-Sponsorship, as substantially the same quotation was included in the first draft of this text to be submitted to the FAE, although this passage was not included in the book as published. 123 It is this two per cent that forms the basis of the theory of Voluntary Listener-Sponsorship, formulated by Lewis Hill. If two per cent of the potential audience would support an alternative, specialized program service Hill's theory stated the service would be self-supporting It was recognized that not every listener would become a subscriber. In fact, audience studies indi cated that the subscribers represented less than a third of the total listening audience. Of this, Hill stated; Here we encounter perhaps the most profound implication of the theory of listener-sponsorship. As a general rule, it is persons of education, mental ability, or cultural heritage equating roughly with the sources of intellectual leader ship in the community who tend to become voluntary listener-sponsors. In the KPFA experiment, this correspondence was empirically unmistakable, although the subscribing audience apparently touched every economic stratum. It is thus clear that the two per cent theory, when we speak of supporting serious cultural broadcasting by this means, represents also a way of extending the legitimate functions of social and cultural leader ship. LItalics in the original.J Obviously, to earn systematic support from the community's intell ectual leadership, the listener-sponsored station must give the values and concerns of that leadership an accurate reflection at their highest level... Because the resulting broadcast service is public, the community at large...is enabled to participate in the best aspects of its own culture as few communities have done before...the richest mental influences of contemporary society can be given unprecedented range beyond the conferences, jour nals, little magazines, soirees, and bull-sessions to which they are normally confined. Or in other terms, that a practical instrument of adult educa tion can be created wherein the concept of the

1$ Hill, Voluntary Listener-Sponsorship, pp.71-74. 129 average gives way to expression of the unique.19 As can be seen, Hill found the program service of the station an integral part of the theory of support. Without the programming that excited and challenged the minority of intellectuals and supporters of creative arts, there was no "cause". It was this fact that contributed to the station's being able to overcome the contradiction of asking the audience to pay for some thing they could receive without paying. The "cause" of KPFA excited and challenged the audience by providing services—programming—that they had not experienced before and that was unavailable elsewhere. Once the programming had attracted the listener's attention, he was confronted not only with the moral obligation to support the activity, but with the realization that unless he and substantial numbers of others did so, the station would be unable to continue.

Conditions Affecting the Experiment During the course of the FAE Project at KPFA, from November, 1951, through November, 1954, several conditions and events affecting the study should be noted. The Decline in FM. Of most drastic importance, both to KPFA and to the FAE Project, was the decline of the FM medium. This was evidenced both in the decline 130 in the number of new receivers manufactured during the period and the virtual disappearance of independent FM stations—those riot merely duplicating a commonly owned AM station's signal. The decline in the production of FM receivers can be seen in Table 1.

TABLE 1 TOTAL FM RECEIVERS MANUFACTURED AND METROPOLITAN SAN FRANCISCO FM PENETRATION, 1947-1954.

Year Total FM Receivers FM Penetration, Manufactured in U.S. Metro. San Francisco

1947 1,176,000 Ufa

1943 1,590,000 9f» 1949 1,362,000 14$ 1950 1,889,000 18$ 1951 1,313,000 22$ 1952 561,000 23$ 1953 445,000 24$ 1954 131,000 24$

Source: Radio Manufacturer's Association.

It will be noted that the total 1954 production of FM receivers was less than ten per cent of the production of only three years earlier. As a result, the number 131 of homes having FM receivers leveled off at a figure somewhat less than one-quarter of the total homes. When KPFA began broadcasting in 1949» FM showed promise of orderly growth. At that time, there were nine FM stations in the Bay Area affiliated with AM stations and duplicating their programs. In addition, there were six independent FM stations on the air, making a total of fifteen FM stations in the area. By 1954» except for KPFA, all the independent FM stations had ceased operation or been bought by an AM station to duplicate the AM signal. Of the ten FM stations con tinuing to broadcast, only KPFA broadcast programming that could not be heard on the AM band. 20 Although this paralleled the declint in FM generally across the nation, it was unaccountably severe in San Francisco. At the same time, it should be recognized that AM radio was undergoing a tremendous upheaval during this period, with the decimation of network radio sche dules in favor of the rapidly-growing television medium. Total radio network revenues for 1954 were about 60 per cent of the 1943 figure, destined to fall to 33 per cent of the 194$ level in two more years. Total radio revenues did not experience a corresponding drop, largely due to increasing local sales, making the total station revenues of 1954 about the same as in 1949•

20Ibid., p. 36. 132 But it must be remembered that in the five years between 1949 and 1954» 750 new AM stations had gone on the air, an increase of nearly 40 per cent. Although total revenues for radio were holding constant, they were being divided into smaller proportionate shares for each station.21 The total impact of this situation was severe in that KPFA had projected its estimates of achieving self- support by 1955 on a projected increase in FM receivers anticipating that more than 50 per cent of Bay Area homes would be equipped for FM reception by that year. This increase never materialized. As a result, KPFA found itself largely promoting FM rather than promoting its own unique programming. In order to attract sub scribers, first the potential listener had to be able to receive the station. If he did not possess an FM receiver, he was likely to encounter substantial diffi culty purchasing an FM receiver of any type, and espe cially a table-model or tuner attachment to add to an existing radio. This shortage of receivers led KPFA to try several plans to aid the situation. First, several department stores were persuaded to carry FM receivers with the assurance that KPFA would direct persons inquir ing about purchasing FM receivers to these stores. At

^Broadcasting Yearbook. 1968. p. 15 and A-118. Figures are drawn from FCC records and reports. 133 one time a combination deal was offered—a six months subscription to KPFA included with each FM set purchased. This made available to KPFA the name and address of new owners of FM equipment for further promotion about the station's programming. Several times, these combina tion offers were featured in newspaper advertising purchased by the store. These arrangements with retailers were difficult to maintain as the supply of FM receivers dwindled. Finally, Pacifica contracted with a local electronics firm to manufacture FM table model receivers, for direct sale to subscribers. This activity was maintained for about five years, from 1953 to 195*3* using receivers made by several different firms at various times. In spite of these efforts, the percentage of homes having FM receivers did not increase perceptibly, staying at between 1# and 24 per cent, as measured by various surveys. 22 This basic fact of a limited potential audience created problems in promoting the station in efforts to

22Four surveys were conducted by KPFA between September, 1951, and October, 1955. The last was probably the most reliable, as it incorporated the larg est sample and was conducted with assistance of faculty of the University of California. Although the three earlier surveys reported 23 to 24 per cent FM penetra tion, the October, 1955* survey reported only 18.5 per cent of the homes in metropolitan San Francisco had FM receivers. See Hill, Voluntary Listener-Sponsorship, pp. 66-69. 134 gain new subscribers. Promotion efforts through normal channels, as newspaper advertising, was uneconomical, since only one-fifth of the public was able to listen, even if an advertisement aroused their curiosity about the station. Although the basic problem was to identify FM owners, there was no simple way to achieve this goal. Retailers seldom kept records of FM purchasers. Finding the FM owner for direct promotional efforts xvas an over whelming problem. At the same time, the disappearance of indepen dent FM programming made editors of radio-television newspaper listings increasingly reluctant to give space to feature FM programming—either promoting special pro gramming or daily program listings. This free promotion was regularly accorded AM radio and television stations, and had been earlier utilized by KPFA and other FM stations. Owners of FM receivers, finding nearly all pro gramming on FM simultaneously duplicated on the AM band, found less and less reason to use FM, especially in view of the special receiving antenna normally required. This, in turn, reduced the chance of accidental tune-in, a normal source of new listeners who might be then induced to become subscribers through direct on-the-air promotions. Thus, it can be seen that the decline in the FM industry had negative influences on the success of KPFA 135 beyond that of limiting the potential audience. Organizational Difficulties. Although the organi zation difficulties of the project will be discussed in detail in Chapter VI, they will be briefly summarized here. In July, 1953? an eight-month period of intense struggle within the organizational structure of KPFA and the Pacifica Foundation was climaxed by the resig nation of Lewis Hill and three others, accompanied by the withdrawal from active program participation of two other staff members. This internal struggle put tre mendous strain on the staff of the station, both before and after Hill's resignation. In addition, the various charges and counter-charges made by the factions involved undoubtedly harmed the public acceptance of the station. Further, the departure or withdrawal from programming functions of a number of key personnel caused a tremen dous strain on the creative resources of the station. Hill's return to the project in August, 1954, although restoring stability, produced another transitional period. Technical Difficulties. As has been described earlier, KPFA bought the transmitter site of a station that had ceased operation, installing a 10 KW trans mitter and using the existing tower and antenna to produce a signal of 54 KW effective radiated power. This signal gave it increased coverage, and greatly 136 increased its reception in the basic San Francisco Metro politan area. However, two problems arose from this installation. First, it became immediately apparent that although this site, high on a mountain-side above Berkeley, gave excellent coverage to the Bay Area and reasonably good coverage to further locations such as Santa Cruz, Sacra- mento, Stockton, San Jose, and Modesto, 23^ northern Ber keley that had previously received an excellent signal, now experienced very poor reception. The area was some what shadowed by the same range of hills from the trans mitter site, receiving a very weak signal or a distorted multi-path signal due to signal reflections stronger than the main signal. In this area lived many University faculty members and other upper-income families, includ ing a high proportion of KPFA subscribers. This reception problem was ultimately solved through the use of the original 250 watt transmitter at the studio location in downtown Berkeley. The FCC, in an unusual action, authorized the use of this transmitter, licensed as KPFB and operating on 89.3 mc., to provide service to those areas of Berkeley receiving poor signals

^See Figure 1 for the estimated lmv/m contours of the 54 KW signal. 137 from the KPFA transmitter.*^ However, KPFA did not begin operation until February of 1954, less than a year before the FAE study was to be concluded. The second technical problem concerned the antenna at the transmitter site. In February, 195 3 > less than a year after the inauguration of the high power signal, arcing developed within the antenna. Twice, the station went off the air while the antenna was removed from the tower and repaired, but the trouble persisted. At inter mittent times the station operated at reduced power be cause of this problem. After the two unsuccessful attempts to repair the antenna, RCA engineers reported that the antenna was a very early model and that further repairs would undoubtedly be futile.2 J• In July of 1954, the power of the station was reduced to 18 KW e.r.p., to partially alleviate the problem, but it was not until 1955

The FCC Rules and Regulations (Section 73.240) state that no FM station will be licensed to persons who own or control another FM station if the 1 mv/m contours of the two stations would overlap. Similar provisions are made for two AM stations or two television stations. The Commission waived this requirement in granting the license for KPFB, and subsequently for licensees of non- commerical television stations, as in Pittsburgh and Chicago. Later the Commission amended its rules to spe cify that the multiple ownership provision does not apply to non-commercial educational FM or television stations. It also should be noted that KPFB is assigned a channel reserved for educational noncommercial stations, while KPFA operates on a commercial channel, but not noncommercially. ^Report to the Fund for Adult Education, December 31, 1953 (Berkeley, California; Pacifica foundation, 1953)» P. 10. (mimeographed). i3d that the station had the financial resources to replace the antenna and restore the station to full power. The new antenna was installed and the station returned to the air with its full power in March, 1955. Neverthe less, at intermittent intervals over a year's time, the station operated with an inferior signal, and for an additional eight months it operated at substantially re duced power. Programming. On April 22, 1954, the station broad cast a program about the use of marijuana, in which four persons who identified themselves as users of the illegal drug set forth their views that the drug should be legal ized, stressing their belief that the drug was non- addictive. Such a program would come as no surprise to KPFA listeners, in view of the wide range of topics normally discussed over the station. However, a local reporter had been advised that the program was to be aired, and an article about the program was published in the San Francisco Call-Bulletin the next day. 27 This led to investigations of the station by both the State Narcotics Bureau and the District Attorney for Alameda County, with full press coverage. Although it was con-

Qf\ Because of a slightly different gain factor of the new antenna, an effective radiated power of 59 KW was achieved from the 10 KW transmitter rather than the 52 KW produced by the old antenna. ^San Francisco Call-Bullet in, April 2k, 1951» P« !• 139 eluded that KPFA had not violated any laws or FCC regu lations, the publicity resulting from the episode was harmful to the station's image, and some persons sought to use this incident to embarrass the management of the station, prolonging the publicity over the incident beyond its normal course. Any of the above factors by itself would tend to make conclusions drawn from the study somewhat imprecise. In combination, they make the results virtually inappli cable to any other situation. The only bright spot in this regard is the fact that each of the factors appears to be a negative one—that in its absence one would expect a greater rate of growth in support for the sta tion. In this respect, it can be reasonably assumed that if the results quoted below are in error, it is highly likely that the error serves to make the results more conservative than should be expected.

Results of the Experiment During the three-year period of the grant from the FAE, the reports had been made periodically to the FAE on various aspects of the project. In addition, major reports were made at the end of the first, second, and final years of the grant. At the request of the FAE, the final report was supplemented by additional research and re-written, to be published under Hill's name with 140 the title Voluntary Listener-Sponsorship. This volume contains the major findings of the three-year project, with suggested applications to other broadcast situations. Promotion. By far, the least expensive and most productive method of promotion was found to be direct on-the-air promotional announcements. This method by passed the obvious problems of other forms of promotion, the difficulty of finding the FM listener. When a person heard an announcement broadcast on FM, it was not necess ary to persuade him to buy an FM receiver—only to sub scribe to KPFA. The station found the most effective pattern consisted of a period of intensive promotional announcements with as many as twelve one minute announce ments per day for about a week, followed by a two to three week period virtually free from air announcements, then another intensive period of announcements, and so on. This was found to be more effective than a constant moderate level of promotional announcements. The follow ing is typical of the announcements used: Among the complex group who make up KPFA's audi ence, there are at this moment a number of persons who have never heard the station before. We should like to address these new listeners for a moment— you if you are one of them. You are hearing, now, an experiment in American radio. It has been designed to show whether a large community like ours is willing to support a radio station whose sole criterion is the value of its programs to mature, intelligent listeners. You will hear no commercials on KPFA. The unique factor in this experiment is listener-sponsorship. Since the station carries no advertising, its support 141 must come, not from advertisers, but from the public it serves. If on listening further, you find KPFA's programs unusual, you may be sure that these pro grams exist only because listeners unusually inter ested in them, and in the plan that makes them possible, are paying the operating costs. To become a sponsor of its programs, the individ ual listener subscribes to KPFA at the rate of $10 a year, or $5-50 for half a year. He then receives, every two weeks, the KPFA Folio, which lists times and brief descriptions for allprograms broadcast by the station. We invite you to consider the relevance of this broadcasting experiment to your own interests. If you would like to receive a sample copy of the pro gram Folio, simply telephone the station at AShberry 3-6767, or mail a postcard to KPFA, Berkeley 4. ° It was found that 22 per cent of those requesting sample 29 Folios became subscribers to the station. In addition to these announcements, the weekly "Report to Listeners" frequently discussed the station's financial situation, as well as programming policies. Occasionally these took the form of emergency appeals for funds to keep the station on the air, and such appeals were made in other time periods on a few occasions. Such instances did achieve the temporary result of producing a response from the listeners sufficient to meet the current crisis. But these appeals were made at the expense of the regular subscriptions, which were found to suffer in the weeks immediately following such crises. Another productive method of securing new subscrip-

Hill, Voluntary Listener-Sponsorship, p. 22-23. 29Ibid., p. 23 142 tions was in the use of volunteer solicitations. It was found that many persons who were persuaded to subscribe in response to an air announcement, had originally lis tened to the station in response to contact by a volun teer. There did not emerge a most productive method for such solicitations. Highly organized campaigns were found to have a high cost, often nearly equalling the return from new subscriptions. The most effective way was to allow the volunteer to promote the station in ways of his own choice, by publicizing the programs, or assisting new subscribers with FM reception problems, or following up by telephone the requests for sample Folios from his area. It was estimated that the per-subscription cost for this method was about $1.15. 30 Of far more import ance was the personal relationship established by this method: ...it is felt that KPFA's relation to volunteer soliciting groups and individuals in its signal area communities was basic to the experiment. The essence of this relationship lay in the stimulation of a personal and mutual concern among a nucleus of subscribers who could be counted on to assist in the actual work of finding and reaching new prospects.31 On the other hand, such methods as direct mail and paid advertising were found, in KPFA's case, to cost more

30Ibid.. p. 27 31Ibid., p. 29 143 than the return. The very nature of KPFA's programming produced much promotion of the station by indirect methods. When a member of the Bar Associations, the Longshoremen's Union, or the Mental Health Society participated in a panel discussion, quite often the agency bulletin men tioned the fact and substantial "tune-in" resulted among members of that particular group. Often the participant inquired about how the station could survive without commercials, and repeated the incredible story to his associates, creating curiosity about the kind of program ming such a station could air. More than a hundred such community organizations were involved in KPFA programs during the final year of the FAE grant, undoubtedly producing much indirect promotion of this nature. Closely related to this indirect form of promo tion was the kind of news promotion that naturally re sulted from the type of programming aired by KPFA. Undoubtedly, KPFA produced more genuine hard news as a result of its programming fare than did any other station in the area. Its discussions, usually controversial, probed issues and produced newsworthy quotations. Its musical programs frequently presented the premiere per formance of modern composers. From these and similar programs, the station was able to generate the kind of actual news that got it space in the newspapers beyond 144 the perfunctory mentions on the radio-television page. Renewals. Obviously of equal importance to the financial success of the station was the task of insur ing as high a renewal rate as possible. In this, the techniques used strongly resembled those employed by magazines, in that most of the effort was connected with the Folio. The last two issues of the Folio sent before a subscription expired contained brief notices that the listener's subscription was about to expire and reminded him that only through the support of the listeners was the programming of KPFA possible. If he did not renew, one additional Folio was sent "V7ITH THE COMPLIMENTS OF THE KPFA STAFF," with a more pointed reminder that: To prove its soundness as a new expression of American culture,...[KPFA] must prove that the discriminating listeners who become subscribers will support superior non-commercial broadcasting year after year, renewing their subscriptions as they expire.32 If the subscription was not renewed following the last Folio notice, a follow-up letter was sent, stress ing programming in more detail. Within three months after the expiration date, an effort was made to reach the subscriber by telephone, either by a staff member or volunteer solicitor. Following these procedures, a renewal rate of 75 per cent was experienced in 1955. Several inquiries into reasons for non-renewal showed

32Ibid.. p. 38. 145 moving from the area and lack of FM equipment to be the two leading reasons. 33 Statistical Findings. The October 1955 survey- found that of the 856,000 dwelling units in the six- counties composing the San Francisco-Oakland metropolitan OJ area, there were an estimated 15^,000 FM receivers. At the time of the October survey, there were 3>350 sub scribers. Comparing this number to the total member of FM-equipped homes, it can.be seen that slightly more (2.1 per cent) of those who could listen to the station were subscribers. 35 The number of subscribers on January 1, 1952, was 1,510. At the conclusion of the project, January 1, 1955, there were 3»302 subscribers. Even so, the sta tion was not self-supporting, although it had achieved the two per cent figure. The key to this seeming paradox lies in the collapse of the FM industry, as described earlier. Hill's original proposal for achieving self- support by 1955 was br.sed on the existence of 240,000 FM sets in the area with a growth rate of 4,000 per month. He anticipated an increase in operating expenses from $4*800 per month in 1951 to $6,000 per month in 1955P

33Ibid., p. 74-76. 34Ibid., p. 20.

3 ^Ibid.t p. 35. 36Ibid., p. 78. 146 and an increase in subscriptions to 7*640 by 1955, which would be exactly two per cent of the projected FM homes. 37 As has been seen above, more definite figures showed that there were about forty per cent fewer FM homes in 1955 than the base figure used by Hill for 1951 to pro ject growth. Obviously the base figure was overstated, and very little, if any, growth took place. Therefore, even though the station had achieved a level of two per cent subscribers from FM homes, the total number of FM homes was still so small as to prevent the station from becoming self-supporting on this basis. Indirectly, the station was the recipient of ano ther smaller grant from the FAE. During the early 1950's the FAE had made various grants to the National Associa tion of Educational Broadcasters (NAEB) to assist in the establishment of a national tape network for educational stations. In turn, the NAEB made grants to member sta tions to underwrite the production of programs for use on the network. During the twelve-month period begin ning July 1, 1953» KPFA received a grant totalling $30,000 in an agreement to produce fifty hours of programming for use by the NAEB tape network.

•^Lewis Hill, "Memorandum to the Fund for Adult Education," (undated, but probably about September 25, 1951) Section III, p. 1. Estimated FM homes in the area were based on figures of Western Research Institute, San Francisco. 147 At various times, both during the three-year grant period and after its termination, Hill submitted other proposals to the FAE, ranging from the establishment of a creative literary magazine to the purchase of AM facilities for Pacifica. None of these proposals was successful. By 1955» the Ford Foundation was deeply involved in the establishment of educational television stations, con suming the major portion of its resources available for mass communications. Pacifica and KPFA were forced to look elsewhere for support. CHAPTER VI

ORGANIZATIONAL PROBLEMS

As was noted in the previous chapter, during 1953 and 1954i> Pacifica encountered serious problems within its structure. Much of the problem was based on person ality conflicts between individuals. But to describe this as the only cause, or even the major cause, would be in the opinion of the writer, to simplify a complex issue, and to do grave injustice to the persons involved. To found and operate a station such as Pacifica, to weather the innumerable crises that occurred, and to devote one's time to a cause that promised so little tangible or intangible return—this task required individ uals of great dedication to principles and ideals. These are the kind of people that were attracted to Pacifica, and carried the idea to concrete reality.

Early History The basic organization of the Pacifica Foundation was examined in Chapter 3. It will be reviewed here briefly.

143 149 Memberships. There were two types of memberships in the Foundation, Executive and Advisory. Only Executive Members had voting power, and this membership was re stricted to "any person who is in continuous active participation in the Foundation"."'" Persons were elected an Executive Member by a two-thirds vote of the existing Executive Membership. Advisory Members were to be elected by a majority vote of the Executive Membership. The By-Laws provided that "The ultimate control of this corporation shall be vested in the Executive Member", 2 although as shall be seen, this was restricted by powers granted to other controlling groups. The Executive Membership was to meet twice a year, and could also meet for special meetings, provided two weeks notice was given. Committee of Directors. To run the day-to-day affairs of the Foundation, the By-Laws established the Committee of Directors. This group was charged with managing "the business and property of the corporation", and was to consist of five Executive Members, elected by the Executive Membership at the annual meeting of the Executive Membership, for a two-year term. Meetings of this group were to be at least once a month, and any action taken by a ma.ioritv of the Directors present,

"^"By-Laws of Pacifica Foundation, Article II, section 2. 2Ibid., Article III, section 1. 150 provided the total present was a quorum (in this case, three), was valid as a corporate act. Officers. The By-Laws provided for four officers for the Foundation. These were Chairman, Vice-chairman, Secretary, and Treasurer. All were to be elected from among the Executive Membership, with the Chairman and Vice-chairman required to be members of the Committee of Directors. These officers were elected by the Committee of Directors. Theory of the Organizational Structure. The basic rationale of this type of organization was the belief of members of the group that the only way a radio station could broadcast news and public affairs programming free from the influence and pressure of advertisers or boards of control was for the broadcasters to be in total control of the station and/or the organization controlling the station. "The original Pacifica notion was a very radical notion—equal pay, control of the station by those doing the operating and creating.4 There was no split between a Board of Directors and the people who did the work. There was a basic kind of honesty, with nothing between the idea and

^Ibid., Article IV, sections 1-6. ^"Richard Moore, personal interview, San Francisco, August 15, 1968. 151 the program. We were responsible for the program ming, not [a] sales [department].5 But from the very beginning there were questions about just who had the authority to make decisions at the station. And there were disputes—endless disputes— about who should have the oower to make decisions for the station. For instance, at an early meeting of the Exe cutive Membership in February, 1947, the minutes report? An extended discussion was held of the relation ship between the staff of the proposed radio station and the Executive Membership of the Foundation on questions of policy and control. The possible functions of a staff council to shape programming was discussed. It was felt that the Foundation had not thought out this problem and further discussion was tabled until the members individually had had an opportunity to consider the problems.° After a week of consideration, the Executive Membership took action, passing a motion: That a temporary committee be designated to study the organizational structure of the Foundation, the functions of its officers and employees, the responsi bilities of the Executive Membership and the Committee of Directors, and any related matters...' Although the motion instructed that a report on this matter be made before April 17, the minutes do not con tain further reference to this matter for two years. At the time the operation of KPFA-Interim was authorized, the Executive Membership passed a motion

^William Triest, personal interview, San Francisco, August 15, 1968. £ Executive Membership, February 26, 1947. ''Executive Membership, April 7, 1947. 152 directing? "...the Committee of Directors be empowered to hire such personnel, purchase such equipment and do such other things as may be necessary to carry on the interim operation." ° This action further concentrated control of the real activity of the Foundation, that is, operation of the station, in the Committee of Directors. In the operation of the station, Lewis Hill, as Chairman, assumed most of the duties normally given to a General Manager of a radio station. He also represented the Foundation to prospective donors, including the foun dations. In the early days, the station operated very much as Lewis Hill wanted it to operate, because most of those associated with him were dedicated to the same basic philosophy and ideals, and because Hill could per suade the group to adopt his ideas. If there was resent ment or disagreement, it was submerged. After all, the course Hill took was often obviously the only course to be followed, at least, if the goals of the group were to be met.

Precipitating Factors By 1952, several factors changed the basic situa tion. First, the FAE grant had lent an air of stability to the station. In comparison to the past three years, g Executive Membership, January 10, 19A-9. N.

153 there was almost prosperity. At least there were enough funds available to the operation that, for the first time, options were available as to how the funds were to be used. Before, there were no options; the meager funds were applied to the most pressing needs, and all else waited. But with the FAE grant, this had changed, and now decisions were made on the basis of desirable options rather than emergency operation. Second, by this time, of the original Executive Membership of Pacifica, other than Lewis Hill, only Bill and Rose Triest remained. The other eight had either moved, or turned to other interests. But of the five...full- time members of the KPFA-Interim staff, however, four remained with the station three years later in 1952. There were Hill; Eleanor McKinney (formerly Eleanor Moore), Program Director? America Chiarito, Music Director; and Ed Meece, Chief Engineer. In addition, Bill Triest and Richard Moore, part-time announcers in the beginning, remained with the staff in 1952, and Bob Schutz, one of the early commentators, was increasingly active in station operations. Third, Hill had always solved his problems by moving forward. When the drive for funds floundered, he put a small station on the air. When forced to sus pend operations, he returned with a more powerful station.

Executive Membership, January 10, 1949. 154 When that station got into deep financial trouble, he persuaded the Fund for Adult Education to give him a grant to further increase the coverage of the station. To boost the operational income of the station, he con tracted to produce programs for the National Association of Educational Broadcasters tape network. He was current ly investigating a television station, not wanting to be left out at some later date, as had happened in AM radio. He had plans for a state network of stations, to include- a repeater between San Francisco and Los Angeles which could relay programs to a sister station for KPFA in Los Angeles. He was negotiating for use of an existing sta tion in Los Angeles, to be supplied programming from KPFA. He was planning a literary magazine, to be published by the Foundation. He was active in setting up a program supply center for educational stations in this country and abroad. In short, he looked ahead and made plans. Yet many in the Foundation held back, taking the position that it was time to consolidate the growth and make KPFA a self-supporting institution, rather than concentrating on new ventures. They pointed out that KPFA had never supported itself from listener-subscrip tions. The FAE grant made the immediate financial picture reasonably secure, but it was on a schedule of a three- year terminal grant. What then, they asked? 155 This basic conflict was not primarily one of personalities, as some have maintained. It was one of decision and policy. It was one of differing viewpoints as to the wisdom of a course of action. It was a con flict of goals versus methods of achieving them. It was all these, long before it became a conflict of per sonalities. As the station progressed, inevitable additions to the staff occurred. The original station was to be an interim operation, with only a minimal staff. As the list of subscribers grew, and the FAE grant made more funds available, others were added to the staff. These included Richard Moore, A1 Partridge, Wallace Hamilton, Bob Schutz, Gertrude Chiarito, and Charles Levy. " In the early days, the group made its decisions after discussion, and mostly by unanimous consent. There are very few formal votes recorded in the minutes of either the Executive Membership or the Committee of Directors before the fall of 1951. It was quite often noted that "it was agreed.." or other words to that effect. Probably the precipitating factor in the major difficulty at the station was the declining participa tion of Lewis Hill during 1951 and 1952 in the immediate supervision of the operation of the station. His health had never been of great vigor, and he had a siege of 156 illnesses during the fall and winter of 1951-52. In addi tion he was combing the country for foundation support for the station, having fairly well concluded that indi vidual donations of sizeable amounts were not likely to materialize. Finally, he had become interested in several other related projects, and these took time away from the station.

The Struggle for Control The minutes of the Committee of Directors show that initial discussion of the possibility of a grant from the

Ford Foundation (sponsor of the FAE) took place Juno 25, Q 1951. Just two weeks later, the minutes shows "It was suggested that Lewis Hill go on part-time for a temporary period, handling legal, administra tive, and overall aspects of the project as well as additional programs for KPFA; that Dick Moore assume the general station directorship; and A1 Partridge program directorship."10 In September, these and other changes in staff re-organization were adopted; ...discussed the administrative and programming readjustments in terms of personnel. The addition of staff members, the reorganization of duties both in administrative activities and station operations require a clarification of responsibilities. The directors appointed the following: a Committee of Directors, June 25, 1951. "^Committee of Directors, July 11, 1951• 157 Executive Directors Lewis Hill Station Director; Richard Moore Production Directors Bill Triest Program Director: A1 Partridge Technical Directors Ed Meece H By the move, Hill remained Chairman of the Foundation, but his direct administrative control over the station was somewhat lessened. Never before had KPFA had a Station Director. Eleanor McKinney (who had been divorced from Dick Moore) now served as Secretary to the Pacifica Foun dation. Later charges were made by dissidents that a "triumvirate" ruled the station during this period—that of Hill, McKinney, and Moore. Interviews with several persons who were at the station during this period reveal that the conflicts continued during the fall and winter although this is not reflected in the minutes of either official group. In January, the Committee of Directors recorded that further discussion of duties and responsibilities of the staff occurred.12 That further conflict was occuring at the station is evidenced by a letter of resignation from the Committee of Directors by Rick Chiarito on April 16, 1952, which said in parts "Since the Committee of Directors seems

1 1 Committee of Directors, September 13, 1951* 1 2Committee of Directors, January 9> 1952. 158 to be essentially non-functioning and functionless..."13 There was strong feeling among the staff at this point that decisions about the operation of the station were being made by Hill, Moore, and McKinney without consult ing the other members of the group. In particular, the question of expenditures seemed to be difficult. Bill Triest, on two occasions in Executive Membership meeting requested that back salaries be paid, at least partially, but the request was essentially denied. But at the time, equipment was being bought and the FAE had given funds to the station for "operating subsidies". Current salaries were being paid, but salary obligations pre-dating the FAE grant were largely left unpaid. During the summer of 1952, as a part of the FAE project, a public relations consultant was engaged to evaluate the promotional program. As a part of his re port, an evaluation was made of "Organization and Manage ment" of KPFA. Although financial and other limitations necessi tated a very modest beginning, the breadth of the Foundation's challenging objectives makes clear the importance of laying sound structural founda tions, capable of gradual expansion...It is under standable that a small group starting a new kind of project, and with creative rather than adminis trative interests and aptitudes, should allow the pressure of their main objective to obscure the organizational looseness and confusion relation ships which apparently developed as the work grew.. * * * * * *

"^Americo Chiarito, letter to Committee of Direc tors, April l6, 1952. 159 On the basis of limited contact with office operations, it appears that your most urgent staff need is for a qualified Business Manager. It is unfortunate to saddle administrative de tails on people who are essentially creative rather than executive in interest and aptitude... This executive should be someone who has no responsibility for planning or participating in your program on the air... * * * * * * There is one characteristic of the Foundation's corporate set-up which involved a difficulty which is not now acute but which might some day become so; The fact that the Committee of Directors consists wholly of staff members, with frequent shifts of officers and directors, involves some strange circumstances...an associate in one department is an officer and director while the head of the same department is not... ***** x The system of having all policies, plans, and procedures determined almost wholly by the inside operating group tends virtually to insulate your organization against the disinterested counsel and influence of other good friends...This implies two rather bold assumptions; (a) that the concept of the Foundation and its operations is so impeccable that it is virtually undebatable, and (b) that the interpretation and pursuit of the objectives can be safely and wisely left to those directly engaged...It is truly an exceptional group that is consistently able, without bias, to pass judg ment on its own performance.l^- Further pressure from the staff as to more exact definitions of duties and responsibilities resulted in a deadlock on the Committee of Directors in September of 1952. Moore, the Station Manager, recommended a plan of IO Americo Chiarito, letter to Committee of Directors, April 16, 1952. "^Harold Strong, "A Report on the Organization and Operations of Pacifica Foundation's KPFA project with Special Reference to Promotion and Public Relations", San Francisco, August 2$, 1952, pp. 4-7° (in KPFA files) 160 staff reorganization. A1 Partridge recommended another. 15 The vote was a tie, with one abstention. Therefore, a meeting of the Executive Membership was called. This dispute apparently arose from a desire to trim the operational expenses of the station by reducing the staff. Hill had sought increased support from FAE, on several bases; the scarcity of FM receivers, delays in initiating the FAE project, and the inflationary trend. The appeal was not successful. He also proposed acquir ing AM facilities, but the FAE held to the terms of the original grant, which included a declining terminal opera tions subsidy. Hence, the station was forced to reduce its operating costs. Moore's plan (which had Hill's approval), proposed to eliminate Wallace Hamilton, whose newscasts had not been of the quality Moore and Hill desired. Partridge's plan kept Hamilton, and eliminated some part-time employees However, the center of the discussion quickly be came the issue of the "authority of the Executive Director 1 Hill in the organization of the operating staff of KPFA.." This meeting crystallized the polarization that had been taking place among the staff members. The dis cussion apparently centered on the question of whether

"^Committee of Directors, September 19 and 30, 1952. 1 f\Agenda for meeting of Executive Membership, October 9, 1952, (included in the minutes for this meeting) 161 the station was to be run as a democracy, ,w.ith equal participation by all in decisions, including decisions to add staff or dismiss staff—or whether this was an admin istrative type function to be delegated to the Committee of Directors or Executive Director along with the respon sibility of maintaining the quality of the station and good working relationships. Early in the meeting, Hill discussed his reluctance to take on the total administrative duties in several instances, and the lack of clear-cut definition of the duties imposed by the office of Chairman and the office of Executive Director. He also agreed that there needed to be a better flow of communication between administration and staff. Staff members discussed the feeling that all station decisions were made by a "triumvirate" of Hill, McKinney, and Moore, controlling the station. The discussion obviously was a thorough exchange of views, but with the result that from this point on, the group was hopelessly polarized. However, in the discussion, Bill Triest and A1 Partridge identified the key issue underlying the whole disputes how can one person be both a staff member and a voting member of a policy board? They both expressed frustration in trying to decide where their duties as staff member left off and their responsibilities as a 162 member of the Committee of Direct,ors began. There was an obvious conflict of interest in many cases, A motion was made that in effect placed the respon sibility for hiring and assigning personnel with the Executive Director, but requiring confirmation of the Committee of Directors when such changes resulted in increases in the budget or in dismissal of a staff member. This motion failed. Another motion, similar in nature, but requiring the Executive Director to obtain prior con firmation of the Committee of Directors for all hiring and assigning to jobs expected to be permanent, was then passed. This was obviously interpreted as a vote of "no confidence" by Hill, Moore, and McKinney. They resigned within the following week, followed by the resignations of five other Executive Members. On October 19? ten days after the previous meeting, another special meeting of the Executive Membership was held, and it was decided to return station and Foundation affairs to the status quo of September 19, a month earlier. This restored Hill, Mcore, McKinney and the five others to membership and office. There was to be an interim period of study of the situation, including development of a plan to enlarge the Executive Membership to include others not 1$ actively engaged xn the activities of the Foundation.

^Executive Membership, October 9» 1952. Executive Membership, October 19» 1952. 163 Late in November, Bob Schutz wrote a memo to the staff that was both bitter and conciliatory toward Hill. After contending that Lew was not indispensable to KPFA, and arguing that even if the station should fail, that would not necessarily prove that listener-sponsorship was unworkable, he appealed to Hill to stay with KPFA. He stated that it was obvious that KPFA needed Hill, and only a little less obvious that Hill needed the project. If this premise could be mutually accepted, he argued, then the real problem was to define the relationship in the most beneficial way: ...Hill is not and cannot be a successful chief execu tive. And I dwell upon this because it is of the very nature of genius to accept no limitations...1 would suggest that Hill's relationship to the project be expressed in some kind of staff job (as the word "staff" is used in business management circles). Whether you call it research or promotion or any one of the other 99 jobs he can do best is of little consequence. The important idea is that the staff man is free to make any investigations, recommenda tions...both at his initiative, with the knowledge and approval of the executive, and by request. He does not give orders.19 From this point on, although the battle had lulled, the lines were clearly drawn. The issue defined itself as a power struggle for control of the station through the Foundation and the Executive Membership. A solution following the general lines of the agreement to expand the Membership was passed in a somewhat restricted form,

"^Robert Schutz, "To Pacifica Foundation Members and the KPFA Staff", November 20, 1952. 164 early in December then rescinded a week later on the rationale that "conflicts within the Foundation [should be] solved on the level of personal relationships where they occurred rather than by changing By-Laws". 20 It is the opinion of the writer that just the oppo site was needed. The personality conflicts had developed because of the unworkable arrangements imposed by the organizational structure of the Foundation, dictated by the By-Laws, and a thorough revision was overdue. Yet the majority of the Executive Membership opposed such a revision, fearing it might give Hill a more firm power base from which to control the station. At this time, probably in response to these feel ings among the Executive Members (who were essentially identical with the staff of the station), Hill circulated a memo stating his intention to complete his activities with the Foundation within eight months, at the end of which he would submit his resignation. In the meantime, several plans of reorganization were circulated and discussed. Early in January, 1953, a plan proposed by Moore was approved by the Committee of Directors. The key features were adoption of a committee method of program planning; definite scheduling of staff time in relation to programming, administrative

20 Executive Membership, December 4 and 9, 1952. 165 and operating duties? and the regular scheduling of staff and intra-staff meetings.21 This apparently settled the issue for a short period. In June, the major explosion occurred, on the 27th; Lewis Hill submitted his resignation from the Foundation, effective July 31, 1953• His memo to the Executive Mem bers states: Our pattern of growth has drawn the project toward establishing other radio stations, toward TV, toward literacy, academic and other functions involving more and more people as well as several national organiza tions. These matters, and the general operation of KPFA, have been in my hands. But although I have tried very hard, I have never been able to get the affirmative support of the project's membership for most of these varied activities and relationships required to sustain it. We have a peculiar group of people? I wish I could say it had been created by choice, but our economic history has not afforded many choices in the selection of personnel. Our group contains some large ideological perspectives, but it is also ridden by some very narrow ones. In general, the staff and membership are inclined to be suspicious or fearful of any relationships, inside or out, which depend upon trust and confidence in other persons. My own activities, first in founding and then in heading the project, have been subjected to more or less continual attack by little minorities of the group, while unfortunately the majority has never developed any strong belief in the external conditions affecting its existence, or rather in my own probity or competence in meeting those conditions. I have thus more than once found myself negotiating a grant or arranging activities for the station which, under attack by a minority of the group, the passive or suspicious majority might fail to support altogether. This situation has worsened, and I can no longer in conscience accept the responsibility for grants of money and the like that require a fulfilling action by the group...

21 Committee of Directors, January 2, 1953. 166 A problem of leadership, and undoubtedly many problems of a purely personal dimension inhere in this dilemma. It grieves me deeply that I have been unable to solve these problems. Yet I would rather leave the project than take the only alternative before me, which is to create the kind of dictatorship inimical to growth....22 The following week, Station Manager Moore, pre sented a plan of staff reduction and reorganization to the Committee of Directors, which would involve elimina ting the positions of five full or part-time staff members, 23 including Wallace Hamilton. The plan was approved.

Three days later, on July 9, the Executive Member ship held a meeting to discuss this action. A resolu tion supporting the action of the Committee of Directors in reorganising the station and dismissing particular 2Ll staff members was defeated, by one vote. Moore then resigned as station director. Then followed a complex maize of resignations and withdrawals of resignations that is too complicated for discussion here. The net effect of these actions, however, was that Moore, Rick Chiarito, and Eleanor McKinney left the station. Wallace Hamilton was installed as Chairman of the Foundation. Hill framed another memo to the group in an effort to resolve the situation, which said in part:

22Hill, letter to Executive Membership of Pacifica Foundation, July 3» 1953* ^Committee of Directors, July 6, 1953• ^Executive Membership, July 9, 1953. 167 In the difficult years of this project I have held, perhaps, too stubbornly, to the idea of a work ing fellowship that shared equally in the large determinative decisions of its own activity. ...I have often been told that the conception was Utopian in the worst sense, for the reason that persons wholly involved in operational tasks could not at the same time be efficient or responsible directors...1 have always felt that the fellowship of ideal implicit in the Pacifica project should permit a stenographer, engineer, or whomsoever, to learn the implications of these ideas in matters of general policy, and in the end to make wise decisions. The internal conflicts at KPFA have pressed hard against this ideal, but also from time to time focussed on my personal role as head of the project. Resigning from the project was to myself a last-ditch effort to permit this principle to prove its construc tive potentials, encumbered by any controversy attached to my personal participation... The rejection and choice of leadership by part of the group had, in my own mind, grievously demonstra ted that the organizational theory of Pacifica Foundation is unsound...Knowing that most of the individuals involved are intensely sincere, I am forced to the conclusion others have reached before me; that an impossible task confronts these individ uals; that the organizational theory is false which requires that engineer, announcer, stenographer,pro ducer, must also be responsible for the decisions of leadership. I am certain it is the theory, not the people, that is false... I am convinced that a complete reorganization of Pacifica Foundation and, as necessary, the staff of KPFA, is required for the future of the project. If the Fund for Adult Education will agree to continue its note [governing a lien on the KPFA property], I am going to undertake such a reorganization.^5 Hill's original resignation had been submitted effective July 31. This being so, as chief officer of

^Hill, letter to Executive Members of Pacifica Foundation and Staff Members of KPFA, July 15> 1953* 168 the Foundation, he requested that the internal troubles of the station and Foundation not be discussed in public (press, Folio, or on the air). Contending that the group in control headed by Hamilton had not been legally elected Hill stated they had no right to take actions in the name of the Foundation. The new Committee of Directors responded that Hill' resignation had been accepted, and that he no longer was Chairman. Obviously, the FAE was concerned with the effect of this change in management. Both sides communicated with officers of the FAE, especially G. H. Griffiths. In tactful way?, they communicated their versions of what had taken place. Both sides now were courting the support of the FAE—Hill's supporters to get the FAE to withdraw the financial support that sustained the station and Hamilton's group to assure the FAE that a legally proper change had been made so that the FAE agreement still stood Officials of the FAE undoubtedly were concerned that Hill, with whom almost the entire agreement had been negotiated, was no longer associated with the station. Their first act was to request a legal opinion as to the legality of the election of Hamilton and others to offi cial positions in the Foundation. Attorney William ¥. Schwarzer, of a San Francisco law firm, after examining the Foundation's Articles of Incorporation, By-Laws, and 169 Minutes of both the Committee of Directors and Executive Membership meetings, concluded that the elections had been legally proper and were binding actions of the Cor poration (Pacifica Foundation). The opinion concluded that the duly elected officers of the Foundation were: Wallace Hamilton, Chairman! Charles Levy, Vice-Chairmanj Gertrude Chiarito, Secretary; and Robert Schutz, Treasurer. These four were also held to have been legally elected to the Committee of Directors. It was further held that the resignations of Richard Moore, Americo Chiarito, and Karl Zapf as Directors and Executive Members were accepted and could not be withdrawn.^ Hill himself had withdrawn his resignation before its effective date, then later resigned again as Chairman and a Director, but not as an Executive member. This left his status in doubt. Therefore, the Executive Member ship at a special meeting July 29> voted to remove Hill as an Executive Member of the Foundation. 27 Eleanor McKinney had been removed as Secretary of the Foundation by the Committee of Directors at a meeting held July 10,

William W. Schwarzer, attorney, for the firm of McCutchen, Thomas, Matthew, Griffiths, and Greene, San Francisco, letter of legal opinion to F. Daniel Frost III, Los Angeles, attorney representing the Fund for Adult Education, August 6, 1953* ^Executive Membership, July 29» 1953* 170 but continued as an Executive Member.28 These events left the affairs of Pacifica Founda tion and KPFA completely in the hands of Wallace Hamilton and his group of supporters. These included Bob Schu':z and Bill Trieste who had been involved with station opera tion since the beginning of the Interim operation, and Gertrude Chiarito, whose husband had been Musical Director for the same period. It also included Hamilton, who had come to the station the previous year5 Chuck Levy, who had been a part-time announcer off and on for two yearsj Bruce Harris, a part-time engineer; and A1 Partridge, who arrived with Hamilton in the spring of 1952, but who returned to the East early in August. Supporters of Hill, remaining as Executive Members, included Eleanor McKinneyj Ida Mae Zapf; Ed Meece, the engineer who had constructed the original stations and Lorraine Campbell, producer of musical programs for chil dren. Bob Schutz apparently was not a strong supporter of Hamilton. He opposed many actions taken by Hill and Moore in running the station, and wanted to see Hill's role modified. Although, he voted against Hill in the July actions, and participated in the new Committee of Directors as Treasurer, he became disenchanted with the new management. In October, an annual report was sub mitted to the FAE, concerning the station's operation od Committee of Directors, July 10, 1953 • 171 during the second year of the FAE grant and projections for the final year. Apparently the financial material contained in this report had been constructed without con sultation with Schutz, who served as Treasurer of the Foundation. Schutz®s response was to write a "Treasurer's Report",29 with the co-operation of Eleanor McKinney, one of Hill's most loyal supporters. The report was duplicated and sent to all Executive Members, some mem bers of the KPFA Advisory Board, officials of the FAE, and Lewis Hill. It is a rather thorough review of total situation that existed at KPFA at the time, with an analysis of why the situation developed as it did. After disclaiming the previous Annual Report by stating it was prepared without his knowledge, and the administration of KPFA had been uncooperative in provid ing him, the Treasurer of Pacifiea Foundation, access to financial records, he set out to do three things: (1) analyze the source of administrative difficulties in the Foundation, (2) analyze the financial data contained in the Annual Report submitted to the FAE, and (3) propose administrative and budgetary solutions to the problems confronting Pacifica.

Committee of Directors, July 10, 1953. ^Robert Schutz, "Treasurer's Report for Pacifica Foundation," Berkeley, October 30, 1952. 172 In the analysis of the administrative difficulties of the Foundation, he concluded: The difficulty of performing these dual functions— staff member of KPFA with its extraordinary demands in time and energy, as well as Executive Member in the Foundation with the consequent necessity to be thoroughly acquainted with the multiplicity of detail in the administrative and policy functions—proved insurmountable...Hill was faced with the impossible administrative task of making outside commitments for a staff which governed him without its being able to afford the time or to gain the perspective necessary to many administrative decisions, and consequently which ruled on the basis of differences in feelings or personality. The experience in Foundation meetings of resistance and hostility to the chief administrator seems to ine to spring out of the "felt" contradiction of leader ship in the midst of organizational "equality".... Those members who were and are primarily engrossed in the internal operation of KPFA are now in control of the station; all members who until July adminis tered the station and Foundation, and raised all the funds still available to it, are forcibly inactive.30 Discussing the difference in philosophy and goals between the two groups, he characterized the Hamilton administration as wanting to cut back and hold on to what exists, rather than to make the kind of long-range planning that had been a part of Pacifica from the beginning. Noting that the FAE funds would terminate within a ye^r, that the number of FM sets was no longer increasing, and that both living costs and technical costs were rising, he questioned the wisdom of the sharply reduced budget pro posed by Hamilton. In addition, he felt the projection of 3750 subscribers by October, 1954, was totally

3°Ibid.» p. 2. 173 unrealistic in view of the fact that the total of October 1953t (2352) was actually fewer than that of June, 1953• He felt a more realistic projection was a total of 3000, which would result in a $35p000 deficit, even with the proposed reduced budget of the Hamilton group. Schutz concluded that it was unlikely that the station would continue to thrive and develop without the long-range planning that had been done by Hill. He also concluded that salaries would have to be raised in order to keep a capable staff. Before recommending solutions, he commented; Ideally, it would be hoped that the aims which the Foundation established, particularly "to gather and disseminate information on the cause of conflict between any and all of such groups.." should apply here "at home".31 He recommended major changes in the composition of the Executive Membership of the Foundation: It is obvious...that the Foundation has outgrown., its original structure. At least it has not worked. With the Foundation and staff membership duplication, it is apparent that it is only a matter of time until there would be another crisis, an ousting of the pre sent administration and all the unpleasant and emo tional disruption that accompanies it. The principle of staff coincidence with Executive Membership must be changed and a new Membership elected.32 The nucleus of this idea had been contained in a letter written by Hill to Schutz in August:

^Ibid., p. 9. 174 Correction of the basic flaws in Pacifica in my opinion requires a reconstituted membership from persons having no interested relation with the opera tion as such.33

The Structure Committee In response to pressure from members of the KPFA Advisory Council as well as a number of subscribers, the Committee of Directors had voted in August to set up an investigating commission of "three impartial individuals," to research the history of the problems of the past summer, by review of documents and interviews. They were to present recommendations and distribute their report Oi to all interested parties. During August and September, much informal nego tiation had taken place, aimed at reconciling the two factions. Much of this was by members of the KPFA staff, present and former; by members of the KPFA council; and by other persons who had been close to the operation. However, these attempts were fruitless, A number of the members of the Council, disturbed at the lack of communication or attempts at reconcilia tion, met September 21 to explore what could be done to improve the situation. They agreed that the organiza tional structure of the Pacifica Foundation and KPFA

-^Hill, letter to Bob [Robert] Schutz, August 12, 1951. •^Committee of Directors, August 3> 1953. 175 needed revision. Roy Sorenson, Executive Director of the San Francisco YMCA, was authorized by the group to meet with Wallace Hamilton in an attempt to agree on procedures to be used in studying the structure of Paci- fica. If a proposal could be drawn, it would be circu lated among the members of the KPFA Council for comment, and then submitted to the Executive Membership of Pacifica for authorization to proceed with the study. Sorenson and Hamilton agreed on a proposal for five persons to form a committees to study improvements in the organizational structure and operating procedure which will main tain free expression....enhance creative program ming and obviate such organizational difficulties which may now be seen. 35 The proposal was approved by the Executive Membership, November 3» 1953. Members appointed to the Structure Committee weres Chairman, Ernest Besig, American Civil Liberties Union; Harold Winkler, Professor of Political Science, University of California; Gregory Bateson, social anthropologist, Veterans Administration, Palo Alto; John May, Executive Director of the San Francisco Foundation; and Karl Olson, minister, Pilgrim Congrega tional Church, San Francisco.

•^Resolution approving establishment of Structure Commit tee, contained in Minutes of meeting of Executive Membership, November 3» 1953. 176 The FAE, while concerned about the situation, had not taken an overt part in the situation since their legal investigation to determine whether the Hamilton group could legally act in the affairs of the Foundation, described above. However, after the prolonged negotia tions which ultimately led to the setting up of the Structure Committee, the FAE informed the officers of the Foundation that in view of the belief of officials of the FAE that reorganization of the Pacifica Foundation was essential to stability of the organization, the FAE urged that such reorganization take place as soon as possible. Accordingly, the FAE did not commit itself to the full grant for the final year, but instead pro-rated monthly support through February 1, 1954. By that time, it was anticipated that the report of the Structure Com mittee could be completed and acted upon, and the FAE q would review the situation again following this action. The Structure Committee held weekly meetings from the middle of November through February. It became obvious that the committee was not going to be able to report before the end of January, particularly in view of the Hamilton group's refusal to consider any reorganization

•^Pacifica Foundation, "Memorandum on Foundation Support for Pacifica Foundation, prepared for the Fund for Adult Education," Berkeley, July 24, 1953. Although the memorandum is unsigned and was sent in the name of the Pacifica Foundation, probably the major author was Wallace Hamilton. 177 plan that would permit the control of the station to move out of their group. At this point, the FAE deliv ered a more strongly worded letter; You will recall that at the time when the Fund normally would have made its decision on the full third-year grant to the Pacifica Foundation (November 1, 1953) certain matters affecting the organization and operation of KPFA — and therefore bearing fundamentally on the Fund's decision — had not yet been resolved. There was, however, every expectation that the analysis and recommendations of a Study Committee could be formulated and acted upon some time before January 31, 1954. In recognition of this special situation, the Fund agreed to provide support on a prorated monthly basis until January 31 — it being our understanding that this would allow ample time for the work of the Study Committee to be completed and acted upon and for the Fund, in turn, to decide on the balance of the third-year grant. ...it appears that it will not be possible for the recommendations of the Committee to be formulated and acted upon any earlier than late February or early March. While we are not unmindful of certain factors which make this delay understandable, to prolong the present arrangement would clearly nullify its entire intent. Accordingly, the Fund is pre pared to extend the present basis of support through February, thereafter withholding decision on further support until such time as formal action has been taken on the recommendation of the Study Committee and the Fund is advised as to the nature of this action.37 The report of the Structure Committee was com pleted February 10, 1954. For the most part, it followed the ideas of Hill and Schutzp described earlier. Executive Members were to be elected for three years, and not more than one-third could be composed of

•^Martha S. Howard, Fund for Adult Education, letter to Wallace Hamilton, January 1&, 1954. 178 paid staff members of KPFA. No more than one paid staff member would serve on the Committee of Directors. The Station Manager would be "selected and employed by, and be responsible to, the Committee of Directors." He would have full authority to hire and fire personnel, and prepare the budget for the station. The Structure Committee concluded from its study; The existing structure which we have examined is not merely clumsy and awkward but so bad that sane persons participating in it could only exhibit bizarre behavior...the nightmarish character of these [past] events was a natural result of the bad structure and that, therefore, blame can not be ascribed to the participant individuals.39 The report concluded by proposing interim steps to be taken to achieve the transition to the proposed organi zational structure. The Committee of Directors considered the report on February 13. Not too surprisingly, they rejected most of the proposals. ...It seemed the first section does not adequately cover the issues involved, and the second part of the report, while its intent is appreciated, is beyond the instructions given to the structure committee. The first section of the report contains

Ernest Besig (chairman), "Report of Structure Committee," San Francisco, February 10, 195k, submitted to the Executive Membership. 39Ibid. 179 recommendations which do not assure the continuation of free expression and creative programming con sidered the purpose of kpfa...40- Nevertheless, according to the resolution estab lishing the Structure Committee, its report was required to be considered by the Executive Membership. Accord ingly, at the March 3 meeting, it was introduced. A motion accepting the recommendations of the committee "in principle" was passed, but a motion to implement these recommendations did not receive the necessary two- / 1 thirds majority. Following this action, April 1, Mr. G. H. Griffiths of the FAE met with the Committee of Directors. At this meeting, Griffiths made the position of the FAE clear again: they regarded the present organization of the Pacifica Foundation and the station as unstable, and while not specifying details of reorganization that would be acceptable to the FAE, there would be no further finan cial support from the FAE until organizational changes JO were made that would assure the FAE of future stability.

Programming Crisis As was described earlier, on April 22, 1954, KPFA broadcast a program about the use of marijuana, in which

^Committee of Directors, February 13, 1954. ^"Executive Membership, March 3, 1954. ^Pacifica, "Memorandum on Foundation Support," p. 8 ISO four people who claimed to use the narcotic set forth their views that the narcotic should be legalized, that they resented being treated as criminals, and that they found the use of marijuana non-addictive. The broadcast received wide coverage in the local newspapers, and representatives of the State Bureau of Narcotics and the Alameda County District Attorney seized the tape and began an investigation of the incident. Hamilton defended the program to the press, say ing that KPFA discussed many minority viewpoints on the air. However, five of the Executive Members, including Bob Schutz and Eleanor (McKinney) Moore, quickly issued a statement to the press denying any responsibility for the broadcast, contending the program was not in the public interest. They were critical of Hamilton's defense of the program which had implied that the station served only "minorities" and the intelligentsia," contending instead that the station had been founded to provide a cultural service to all the people of the Bay Area. The statement concluded: The present administration of the station acquired control only ten months ago. During this period we, a substantial part of the Foundation, have attempted to correct numerous departures from KPFA's original purposes, and we will continue to do so. 181 We do not intend to engage in any public contro versy over the internal conflicts in Pacifica. but find it necessary to make our position clear.43 In a letter to the editor of the San Francisco Chronicle, published May 13, Eleanor (McKinney) Moore elaborated on her reasons for criticizing the broadcast; It is perfectly obvious that marijuana and its uses are a subject that ought to be completely open to discussion...If it were the intention to explore it thoroughly, the different medical opinions should be set forth, with the views of law enforcement officers and most certainly the opinions of private citizens with personal knowledge of the subject. By placing all these views and experiences in a single context or series...it would be possible to present a genuine helpful summary of the subject... During its five years on the air, KPFA has broad cast a great many programs on subjects far more controversial than marijuana...But controversy has always been given a context...The problem in the recent incident was that...the broadcast itself— given no context—was open to the charge of stimu lating sensation-seeking...Real issues surround the problem of marijuana and these issues were not illu minated by the broadcast. I do not feel that actions of this kind deserve to be defended in the name of free speech.44 In the meantime, offended by the refusal of the Executive Membership to approve the organizational changes proposed by the Structure Committee, and viewing the marijuana program as symptomatic of the problems besetting the station, twenty-six members of the KPFA

^San Francisco Chronicle, April 26, 1954, p. 11. ^Eleanor [McKinney] Moore, Letter to the Editor, San Francisco Chronicle, May 13» 1954» p. 1&. 162 Council publicly resigned, These prominent civic leaders and educators statedt We have permitted the public use of our names to assist the KPFA project, believing that it could make an important contribution to the cultural life of the Bay Area. The station's record has been excellent, and the principles on which it was founded have our warm approval. However, because of a recent change in the station's administration, and many circum stances surrounding that change, we no longer feel we can place confidence in the station's activities without reorganization of the control of the station. ...Our conclusion is reached after ten months of efforts to improve an internal situation which we believe to be unsound. [We] have clung to the hope of resolving conflict and remedying the organiza tional defects because of our faith in the idealism of KPFA's founding and early administration, and in the unique service which it is capable of rendering. We are now convinced beyond a doubt that faith must be abandoned unless there is a reorganization in the mode of control and a change in the administration of the station.45 Following this public statement, which was printed in most of the area newspapers, several staff members took occasion to comment on the matter in broadcasts over KPFA. Dean Frank Freeman, one of those who had resigned, requested time to answer these broadcasts. The Committee of Directors offered to allow him to participate in a program to explore the matter with another person "whose i £ views may differ with Dean Freeman." He refused this

^"Memorandum to the Secretary of Pacifica Founda tion," signed by twenty-six Council and Advisory Members of Pacifica Foundation, Berkeley, April 26, 1954. ^Statement by the Committee of Directors, Pacifica Foundation, May 7, 1954. 183 offer, stating it did not offer equal opportunity to reply to the earlier broadcasts. Dean Freeman and three other representatives of the resigned Council and Advisory Members then filed a complaint with the Federal Communications Commission, charging that the KPFA management (1) did not have the financial resources to continue to serve the public, (2) had misrepresented many things, including the finan cial condition of the station, the circumstances of their achieving control of the station, and the motives of those who had resigned, and that they had done so in programs broadcast over the . station to justify their personal conduct, (3) had demonstrated a fundamental ignorance of the responsibilities of a licensee, (4) had resisted attempts to introduce adequate representation of the public or the subscribers in its controlling body? and (5) had attacked the motives of Dean Freeman and others who had resigned in programs broadcast by the sta tion, but refused adequate opportunity for the attacked persons to reply to these broadcasts, a violation of the principles of the "fairness doctrine." ^ Crisis. Summber 1954

Faced with these public pressures on one handf and a critical financial situation on the other, the Hamilton

^Dr. Frank N. Freeman and others, letter of complaint against radio station KPFA, sent to the FCC, June 11, 1954. 184 group was nearing desperate status. From October, 1953, to May, 1954? they had been able to increase the number of subscribers from 2,800 to 3*400, an increase of more than forty per cent. However, following the publicity generated by the marijuana broadcast and the public resignations of the Council and Advisory Members, sub scriptions slumped, falling off 200 subscribers by July. Combined with the loss of support from the FAE, effective in March, this placed the station under great financial pressure. A special request to the FAE to reconsider their decision to suspend further support under the grant was submitted July 24. Before the FAE could respond, changes took place in the management of the station. At a meet ing of the Executive Membership on August 4» a series of motions were passed which had the effect of a clear vic tory for Lewis Hill. The actions taken were as follows; (1) the position of President of Pacifica Founda tion and Radio Station KPFA was created with the following duties and responsibilities: (a) to be responsible for establishing and maintaining such communication, structure, and authority within this membership as may be required... (b) to administer KPFA and be responsible for personnel in KPFA and the Pacifica Foundation. (c) to establish and maintain budgetary control. 1S5 (d) to be responsible for all relations of KPFA and Pacifica Foundation with all individuals, Foundations, and business organizations. (2) The Committee of Directors was directed to offer the position of President to Lewis Hill. (3) All present members of the Committee of Directors were removed from office. (4) Robert Schutz, Eleanor McKinney Moore were elected Directors, and Gertrude Chiarito, Chuck Levy, and Watson Alberts were re-elected as Directors. (5) At an immediate meeting of the Committee of Directors, Robert Schutz was elected Chairman of that group.48 Following this meeting, Wallace Hamilton, William Triest, Bruce Harris, and Roy Kepler resigned from their positions at the station, and Triest resigned as an Executive Member. At subsequent meetings of the Executive Membership, held August 20 and September 8, the following actions were taken: (1) By-Laws were amended to provide that no more than one-third of the Executive Members could be employees of Pacifica Foundation. (2) The Committee of Directors was enlarged to seven members, no more of two (the President and one other) could be employees of the station of the Foundation.49

J Executive Membership, August 4, 1954> and Com mittee of Directors, August 4, 1954. ^Executive Membership, August 20 and September S, 1954. 186 These actions were implemented at the October 29.annual Executive Membership meetings, when twenty-two new Execu- tive Members ;ere elected. 50 Dean Frank Freeman was elected as Chairman, and Hill retained the position of President of Pacifica Foundation. Bob Schutz was named Station Manager. Thus the organizational problems of the Foundation were solved for the moment. The concept of having the station's staff as the controlling body of the station and the Foundation had been a fundamental part of the idea of the station. It had placed a great deal of responsibility on the station's staff, beyond the sphere of their individual jobs. It required total dedication to the aims and goals of the project as a whole, and a personal committment to attain those goals. At the same time, it required subordination of personal feelings and goals to those of the project. McKinney observes; "Perhaps it never would have survived without this intense and personal dynamic." 51 But as the station grew from this tightly knit group of idealists into a functioning institutions, it was inevitable that clear-cut leadership would be required. Hill sensed this, and attempted to provide this leader ship, but the structure would not permit it. The staff of the station clung to the power that had been intended

^Executive Membership, October 29, 1954. ^Mc Kinney, "KPFA History," p. 11. 137 to provide a consensus and protect against the interfer ence of sponsors and owners. Instead, the power of the staff was used to protect personal interests within the station, and to promote factionism among the members of the Foundation. As the station moved from a bare existence with virtually no choices of action into a period where there were some, although limited, decisions to be made as to alternatives in the operation of the station, the defects in the structure became apparent, and nearly fatal.

Development of Pacifica Under the New Structure During the next twelve months, the operation of the station was quite successful. The staff, reorganized under Schutz's direction, worked smoothly. Hill was work ing on plans to expand the station into AM operation. The renewed confidence in the station, brought by the reorganization and restoration of Hill's group to con trol, as well as renewed promotional activities resulted in an increase in current subscriptions to more than 4,000 by December of 1955* 52 In addition, the station secured local donations of $41,419 during approximately the same period to meet the operating deficit. 53

52Hill, Voluntary Listener-Sponsorship, p. 78. ^Hill, letter to G. H. Griffiths, November 25, 1955. ids Flans for Expansion As was described earlier, the future of the FM medium was not bright in 1955> the time of the termina tion of the FAE grant. Although KPFA had demonstrated that it could secure two per cent of those who were able to listen, the number of homes having PM sets in 1955 was still less than twenty per cent. It was evident that the station could not be self-supporting from subscriptions in the near future, so long as it remained tied to FM. During the fall of 1955? a mimeographed prospectus was prepared, discussing (1) the purchase of AM facilities for KPFA, (2) the establishment of a Los Angeles FM sta tion, (3) the linking of KPFA to the proposed Los Angeles FM station by a mid-state relay, and (4) the establishment r j of a monthly Folio Journal. These were resumptions of projects that Hill had under consideration before leaving the station in the summer of 1953. The plans for establishing an AM operation were based on the purchase of some existing facility, since no

^Pacifica Foundation, "Outline of Budgets and Fund-Raising Procedures for the Development of a Perman ent Operation (AM-FM) at KPFA, Berkeley, Based on Listener-Sponsorship; For Extension of Pacifica Broad casting Activities to Southern California5 and for Establishing a Monthly Journal Related to These Activities, Berkeley, undated. 1&9 additional AM channels were available.^55 The estimated cost of such acquisition was $150,000, although it was obvious that this estimate was subject to the realities of actual negotiation. The Los Angeles FM proposal would extend the KPFA program services to that city, supplemented by a limited amount of local programming. The immediate proposal was to lease the transmitter facilities of station KFMB, which had ceased operation, and transfer the license of the station to Pacifica. The KFMB transmitter was atop Mt. Wilson (as are most of the Los Angeles television stations and a number of FM stations), having a power of 58 KW, approximately the same as KPFA. The construction of a satellite station, to be located at mid-state between Berkeley and Los Angeles would make it possible to relay programming of Berkeley to the Los Angeles station directly off the air. Thus, the Los Angeles station would start with a minimal staff, mostly engineering and promotion personnel, and rely

55 The reader will recall that this was the reason the original station was established on FM frequencies in 19A-9. However, the holder of a Construction Permit for an AM station in the area had not constructed the station, and Hill felt it could be transferred to Pacifica at a cost less than that usually involved in buying an exist ing station. This CP was for a station limited to day time hours, a distinct disadvantage for the type of pro gramming and audience of KPFA. 190 heavily on KPFA for programming. It would be enabled to grow as rapidly toward a larger staff and independent programming as the development of Southern California subscriptions permitted. The plan was unsuccessful. After a year, it was obvious that the necessary funds would not be obtained for either the purchase of AM facilities or the activa tion of a Los Angeles station. The Committee of Directors November 20, 1956, voted to abandon plans for AM expansion but to retain the objective of the establishment of an FM station in Los Angeles as funds became available. 57

Financial Crisis, Spring 1957 During the spring of 1957, the station once again began to accumulate a deficit, at a larger than normal rate. Although the number of subscribers had climbed to 4$00, the operating costs had risen to S$,000 per month, making a deficit of more than £2,000 each month. The station had never supported itself by the income from subscriptions alone. The difference between the actual operating costs and the income from subscriptions had been made up by donations and grants of various kinds. In the spring of 1957, these additional donations became

^Pacifica, "Outline of Budgets. . p. 17. "^Committee of Directors, November 20, 1956. 191 increasingly difficult to solicit, and the deficit of the eg station exceeded $1#,000 by the end of July. In February, Hill had addressed a letter to the Chairman of the Foundation, stating his desire to leave the Presidency "at some early date," because he no longer felt able to do the fund-raising work of the Foundation, and for personal reasons. 59 In April, differences between Hill and Schutz, serving as station manager, over budgetary matters led to Hill's firing Schutz. During June, Hill also fired two other staff members, Mrs. Barbara Campbell and Robert Schneider, both of whom were members of the Cali fornia Federation of Teachers. The latter two staff members protested the firing to the CFT, which announced its intention to hold a hearing to determine whether it should issue a strike notice against the station. In view of this, the Committee of Directors proposed to investi gate the details of the incident, but Hill protested that hiring and firing were the responsibility of the President. However, in view of the external strike

^McKinney, "KPFA History," p. 15. "^Committee of Directors, February 1$, 1957* ^Committee of Directors, April 15, 1957J and personal interview with Robert Schutz, Berkeley, Cali fornia, June 20, 1968. 192 threat, the Committee of Directors overruled Hill, unanimously.^ The following day Lewis Hill took his own life. He was thirty-eight. Obviously, one would look to the causes of such a tragedy. No single factor emerges. Undoubtedly, it was a complicated, complex combination of factors that led Hill to his suicide. He left a note, but it is not very specific % "Not for anger or despair but for peace and a kind of home." To be sure, the action of the board undoubtedly was the precipitating factor. It was the first time the Committee of Directors had united against Hill.62 But to conclude that this was the total motivation for Hill's action would be to be content with a very super ficial explanation. Hill regarded himself as a creative person rather than an administrator. As discussed in Chapter III, he was a poet and writer. He had been working on a novel during the spring, and rewriting his poems for publication. He grew so discouraged over the latter that he destroyed

^Committee of Directors, July 29, 1957. ^Russell Jorgenson, personal interview, San Fran cisco, July 22, 1968. Jorgenson had been a member of the Committee of Directors since early 1956, and later served as President of Pacifica. 193 most of them, concluding that they were not of sufficient merit. Several persons who knew him well have spoken of his discouragement over his writing. As has also been noted earlier, Hill experienced persistent ill health. He suffered from arthritis of the spine, which caused him more or less continual pain. The previous summer, he had suffered what was described by his secretary as a "slight stroke" and was on leave from /" i Pacifica most of the summer. ^ There is also evidence that the various pressures on his life were creating strains on his marriage. For about five years, he had lived with his family at Duncans Mills, California, near Santa Rosa—nearly sixty miles northwest of San Francisco near the Pacific Coast. During the previous year, he had taken a small apartment in Oak land, to do writing and for convenience with the work at KPFA, while his wife and family remained in Duncans Mills. Finally, there was the matter of the tremendous responsibility to keep KPFA alive. It should be obvious to the reader that the financial pressures of keeping the station operating were at best extremely frustrating, especially to a person that was essentially creative like

^Mrs. Joy Hill, letter to author, May 28, 1969. ^See letters to G. H. Griffiths, June 15, July 2, and August 27, 1956. 194 Hill, He had no taste for fund-raising; he did it because it was necessary. > One of the staff members who had known Hill well over a long period of time, Denny Wilcher, was asked to write to Mr. Griffiths, of the FAE, concerning the tragedy. He wrote; No simple statement will throw much light on Lew's decision to take his own life. No single explanation can be too relevant, though various persons might propose them. You are aware that Lew's health was never good. You are well aware of the tension created by unrealized goals in the Pacifica Founda tion and the grinding financial problem. I would also try to describe a kind of intellectual frustra tion, something possible native to a person whose mind could work as quickly and "enormously" as Lew's...I am submitting this, not to propose that one add up the parts and make some kind of whole, but to suggest lines of thought...65 Robert Schutz, after twenty-one years, speculated; None of us was big enough to show Hill that we cared for him—no one in that station—no one in his life really could convince him that he was cared for. He was an utterly lonely man. And he isolated him self by his sharp tongue, his wit, and his intelli gence. It's hard to believe that if he'd felt loved, he could have committed suicide. Obviously, Hill's suicide was a tremendous shock to the staff of the station, and to all concerned with its operation. Of the many tributes paid to him, the writer has selected two;

Denny Wilcher, letter to G. H. Griffiths, September 26, 1957. 66Robert Schutz, interview, Berkeley, California, July 20, 1968. 195 ...Lew was an uncommonly gifted and dedicated man and his loss is truly a loss to the entire American scene which needs so desperately the integrity and commitment which he embodied. 57 —G. H. Griffiths, Fund for Adult Education. I regard Lewis Hill as one of the truly creative personalities of this generation. His contribution to the intellectual and cultural enrichment of our society is one of such dimensions as to defy adequate evaluation. In an era in which the functions of communications have assumed vast proportions— bewildering potentials for man's growth and frighten ing potentials for man's exploitation—we have been fortunate to have a man of such vision and insight... Idealism, especially in the young, is far from being an unknown quality in modern society. But what is start]xngly rare today is to find a man in early middle life so committed to his ideals that he is able to resist the deadening temptations of our Lime toward conformity, personal comfort and security. —Dr. Gordon Agnew, Chairman of Pacifica Foundation."® October 28, 1957» Dr. Harold Winkler was elected President of the Pacifica Foundation, and appointed mana ger of KPFA. Dr. Agnew continued to serve as Chairman of the Committee of Directors. Between the time of Hill's death and the time Dr. Winkler was elected, $30,000 was contributed to erase the station's deficit and to provide operating funds for A Q the remainder of the year. The following April, KPFA was selected to receive the George Foster Peabody award for Public Service, one

^G. H. Griffiths, letter to Denny Wilcher, Pacifica Foundation, October 7» 1957. / -A From a broadcast of radio station KPFA, August 3» 1957* also reprinted in Folio. VIII (August 18, 1957), p. 1. ^McKinney, "KPFA History," p. 15. 196 of broadcasting's highest awards for

"...courageous venture into the lightly-trafficked field of thoughtful broadcasting, and for its demon stration that mature entertainment plus ideas con stitute public service broadcasting at its best.r'7°

Later Changes in Organization With the change in the composition of both the Executive Membership and the Committee of Directors, to include a majority of persons not employed by Pacifica, the major decision-making body became the Committee -~f Directors, which gradually became referred to as "the Board of Directors/"' although this was not its prope> name. Where before, the Executive Membership, had, on occasion, instructed the Committee of Directors to t->ke certain actions, or overruled actions taken by that group, this had not occurred since the revisions in organization in the fall of 1954. While it is accurate to say that prior to 1954, the Committee of Directors transacted the vast majority of the business of the Foundation, the ultimate control rested with the Executive Membership- Although this ultimate decision-making role was rarely exercised, it was used by the Hamilton group to take con trol of the station by overruling actions of the Com mittee of Directors. Although technically this possibility still existed after the changes made in 1954, by increasing the size of

70Folio, IX (April 13, 1953), p. 1. 197 the Committee of Directors to seven, and restricting the employees to one member in addition to the President, this body became much more analogous to a corporate Board of Directors, and the Executive Membership, some what similar to the stockholders, having little power beyond that of electing Directors. But there the analogy must end, for the members of the Executive Membership did not own Pacifica, nor could they join this body at will, as can stockholders. They must be elected to membership by the present members. In actual practice between 1954 and 1961, persons were more commonly selected for membership on the Com mittee of Directors by the members of that group, who then recommended to the Executive Membership that these persons be made Executive Members, a requisite for being a Director, and simultaneously elected to the Committee of Directors. The process was obviously cumbersome. With the establishment of KPFK in Los Angeles in 1959 and the acquisition of WBAI in New York in i960, it became desirable to elect Directors from those areas. There had been five Directors prior to 1954, increased to seven at that time. The number was increased to eleven then to fifteen, and to twenty-one in the fall of i960. The Executive Membership, which had numbered twenty-two in 1954, had been gradually increased to thirty-three in 1959, then to forty-two in I960. The latter group, 198 meeting twice a year to hear reports and confirm nomina tions for membership in the Committee of Directors, became more and more difficult to call together, espe cially with the addition of members from the New York area. For these reasons, on September 30, 1961, new By- Laws were adopted providing for a Board of Directors. Although twenty-one directors were authorized prior to the adoption of the new By-Laws, only sixteen persons were actually members of the Committee of Directors. These sixteen were elected to membership in the newly created Board of Directors, effecting a minimal transition.71 The new By-Laws eliminated completely the Executive Membership. Executive Committee. The By-Laws adopted in 1961 provide for an Executive Committee of five persons, including the President and Chairman of the Foundation. It is a relatively weak body, limited to "only such powers as the Board shall delegate to it. 72 However, within six months, the Board delegated rather broad powers to the Executive Committees ...for the purpose of providing means for transacting urgent business where the effectiveness of this Corporation would be impaired by waiting till a regularly scheduled meeting of the Board, the

"^Pacifica Foundation, "Reply to FCC Inquiry of February 7S 1963," filed with FCC April 26, 19o3. "^Pacifica Foundation, By-Laws (adopted Novem ber 14, 196l), Article 6, Section 1. 199 Executive Committee of this Board is hereby author ized to act for this Board in all respects except that the Executive Committee shall have no authority to amend the By-Laws of the Corporation.73 This power was used extensively in dealing with the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee Hearings and the FCC crisis of 1964, discussed in the following chapter. Revisions in the Method of Selecting Board Mem bers, 196&. After a study of the organization in 1968, the Board adopted a statement which (among other things) specified that each station area was to be represented on the Board of Directors by at least three members. 7/ As a part of the same statement, the function of the Local Advisory Board was spelled out in much more detail. The three members of the National Board (as the Board of Directors became designated) elect three addi tional members to form the local Advisory Board, with the local station manager being an ex officio member of this body. Their specific functions include; a) Interpret National Board policy. b) Review and approve plans and budgets before presentation to the national board. (c) Monitor and guide implementation of the ratified plan and budget. (d) Review proposals involving their station. (e) Evaluate managerial performance and make recommendations to the President, Executive Committee, and/or National Board.

^Board of Directors, April 10, 1962. ^Pacifica Foundation, "Organization and Proce dure," adopted by Board of Directors, March 9 and amended June 1, 1968, Section 1. 200 (f) Represent the station before the community as requested or required. (g) Apply its professional acumen on behalf of the station.75 It was clearly specified that "The Functional Responsi bility of this group is advisory, and no actions may be undertaken that preempt the authority or responsibility of the National Board of Directors."^ Administrative Council. . The final change- made in 1968 was to set up an "Administrative Council," composed of the station managers and the "executive officer of the Foundation." It was given a number of functions, mostly administrative, dealing with budgets and personnel. However, it also was to ...plan Foundation activities5 prepare and submit funding proposals to individuals, institutions and agencies| and prepare and submit revisions in Founda tion policies to the National Board of Directors.77 Although it was specified that this group would meet "twice quarterly," this has not been the practice. In the year following its establishment, it has met only three times, and the Executive Committee increasingly handles the business of the Foundation that is not brought before the full National Board of Directors.

75 Ibid., Section 4o 76Ibid. 77Ibid., Section 3. 201 Summary The organizational structure set up by the original members of Pacifica provided for equal participation by all persons involved in station operation,, and an equal pay scale for all employees. It was idealistic, but most of the goals of the Foundation were idealistic. The reason for this organizational form was primarily to permit the greatest possible freedom for those producing programs—freedom from outside forces such as advertisers or agencies, as well as freedom from internal forces such as owners, managers, and Boards of Directors. However laudable these principles may have been, as the station grew from a dedicated, tightly-knit group into a functioning institution, the structure of the station and the organizational form of the controlling foundation served to intensify inevitable personal con flicts. For the survival of the station, it was necessary to modify the structure in order to give more power to the executives of the station and add the stability of disinterested persons to the controlling board. Even with this change, difficulties within the structure persist, although not of the severity of those of the 1952-54 period. Undoubtedly, many of these problems are typical of those found in any radio station— commercial or non-commercial. These problems are intensi fied at KPFA by the personal identification most Pacifica 202 employees feel for the station. They come to the station with a strong sympathy for the goals and ideals of Pacificaj they work long hours for low pay because of their devotion to these principles5 and they come to feel a sense of responsibility for the overall success of the station. Therefore, any problem that arises is imme diately of more than normal concern to each employee, whereas in the normal station, most employees would merely shrug their shoulders and hope the boss could somehow handle the situation. Add to this the perennial financial difficulties under which all the stations exist, lending an underlying insecurity to the whole operation. In this atmosphere, each small problem is immediately more threatening than in a financially secure station. Finally, because the personnel give of themselves so far beyond what would normally be required, and at such great personal sacrifice in terms of salaries and other benefits, those in management have often been reluctant to discipline or discharge those whose perform ance was not adequate. On those few occasions when persons were discharged, other staff members frequently launched substantial protests from the same motivations. Where in the normal radio station, firings are a matter of course in cases of poor performance or programming differences, this has not been the case at Pacifica. 203 As a result, the dissidents have usually stayed on the staff and attempted to persuade others to their point of view—resulting in an excess of time and energy being devoted to inside-the-station political fighting. In conclusion,, the Pacifica stations, particularly KPFA, being unique in goals and structure, experienced many stresses not found in other more traditional .organi zations. One of the most serious of these involved personal conflicts among staff members, while a lesser, but still serious problem has been establishing suffi cient management authority to insure adequate performance from all employees. CHAPTER VII

GOVERNMENTAL INVESTIGATIONS OF PACIFICA STATIONS

The average radio station, aside from the burden of completing the application for license renewal every three years and the annual reports of financial data, actually has little direct contact with the Federal Communications Commission. To be sure, many of the sta tion's actions and operating procedures are dictated by the Rules and Regulations of the FCC, and many decisions are made on the basis of what the management perceives to be the attitude of the Commission. Nevertheless, relatively few stations have been subject to any kind of direct decision by the Commission itself beyond the original granting or transferring of a license. In this respect, the Pacifica Foundation is an unusual licensee. It has been involved in four major decisions by the Commission, all involving a detailed statement of Commission policy. In addition, the Founda tion has been the subject of an intensive investigation resulting in hearings before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee.

204 205 These investigations have concerned three issues: (1) the loyalty of individuals on the staff and members of the Board of Directors, (2) a technical issue of transfer of control from the Executive Membership to the newly created Board of Directors in 196l, and (3) various programming complaints, mostly relating either to com plaints of obscene or indecent language, or controversial materials. Each of these issues will be discussed in turn.

A. LOYALTY There are some in the United States who draw a close connection between Communism and (1) anyone who questions fundamental institutions of American life, or (2) anyone who expresses belief in socialist principles. Pacifica had broadcast a great deal of programming that involved persons doing both of these. The station also had broadcast a great deal of programming that represented views supporting the American status quo and/or conserva tive principles. Nevertheless, the founders and later officers undoubtedly represented basic viewpoints that were rather liberal, and certainly pacifist. As such, they had opposed war, opposed the armament race, strongly supported the United Nations, advocated world government, and supported civil rights. In the McCarthy era, such beliefs and activities often were taken as prima facie evidence of a "Communist sympathizer." 206 As believers in these principles, many at one time or another had been connected with organizations that ultimately were labeled as "Communist-front organizations" or "subversive organizations" on somebody's list. Some of the organizations did have Communist members or members that followed the Communist line. At the time that I was going to the University of California, I was very active in the Anti-War Movement, which was prior to the German attack on the Soviet Union. I found that I agreed with a great number of principles that were being stated from the platform relative to the war in general. All at once I found myself very much alone, because all the people I had worked with for many years were suddenly extremely pro-war and I was out there on a limb.l Many of the persons connected with Pacifica had had simi lar experiences. Many, being pacifists, had been sin cerely involved in organizations that were devoted to peace causes or disarmament, i-jhich were later infiltrated or dominated by Communists. It is ironic to recall that Lewis Hill had strongly opposed Communists, on the grounds that they did not think for themselves, but followed an externally imposed doctrine. In the original prospectus for the station, he had suggested that the station could fill a void in objective coverage of labor news; Unfortunately the only press and radio sources of consistent and comprehensive labor reporting

Richard Moore, personal interview, San Francisco, August 15, 1966o 207 are either controlled by the Communist party or Stalinist in inclination.2 In discussing an incident in 1953? Hill had stated; "The station is interested in Dr. Kahn's criti cism of American society, and in his independent thought, but not the party line."3 On this occasion the Executive Membership decided; (1) The station occupies a clear position on free speech, and the representation of the entire spectrum of political positions...[It is] the station's policy that the Stalinist Marxist point of view should be honestly expressed and identified to have a valid place in the entire spectrum of political positions on the air."^ Among the commentators appearing on the Pacifica stations in the period immediately preceding the Senate hearing were Dorothy Healey, Chairman of the Communist Party of Southern California^ Steve Murdock, writer for the People's World, identified by the Senate investigators as the official Communist west coast newspaper^ and Herbert Aptheker, editor of Political Affairs, identified by Senate investigators as a Communist Party publication. Mrs. Healey freely admitted her membership in the Communist Party, and Murdock had been identified as a Communist before the House Un-American Activities Com mittee. Aptheker had broadcast over KPFA and WBAI for

2"KPFA, a Prospectus," p. O Executive Membership, May 14, 1953. 4Ibid. 208 about a year, but had been replaced5 Mrs. Healey and Murdock were two of thirty-three commentators broadcast ing over KPFA and KPFK in February of 1963 Other commentators included the Chairman of the Republican State Central Committee in California, a former Democratic assemblyman» the Chairman of the Unitarian Ministerial Association, and a college professor who was President of the Los Angeles chapter of the Federation of American Scientists. Senate investigators also were interested in William Mandel, who they linked to several "Communist- front organizations," and who had refused to answer questions about his membership in the Communist Party on the basis of the Fifth Amendment. Mandel appeared on KPFA as a translator of news articles from the Soviet press. Of the present officers of Pacifica, the Senate investigators had strong evidence that two had been Communist Party members at one time, although both testi fied that they had had no associations with the party for nine and nineteen years respectively. These two were Jerome Shore, who had been executive vice-president of

^See list supplied to Senate Internal Security Subcommittee by Trevor Thomas, in U. S. Congress, Com mittee of the Judiciary, Senate Internal Security Sub committee, "Pacifica Foundation, Hearings," January 10, 11, and 25, 1963, 88th Congress, 1st session, 1963, pp. 118-119. (Hereinafter referred to as "SISS, Hearings." 209 Pacifica less than a year; and Catherine (Cory) Gumpertz, who had been station manager of KPFK, Los Angeles, for two years. Basically, these were the persons the investigation centered about. The Senate Investigators were also con cerned that WBAI had broadcast proceedings from the national convention of the Communist Party, including speeches by party leaders, and that Pacifica stations had broadcast a few taped programs from Radio Moscow.

Preliminaries The first word that any person connected with Pacifica had that Pacifica was to be investigated was a telegram to Dr. Peter Odegard, a member of the Board of Directors, saying his appearance before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee (SISS) had been cancelled. This was December 19, 1962. Odegard contacted Trevor Thomas, acting President of Pacifica. After an inquiry from a reporter from the San Francisco Chronicle about subpoenas, Thomas called the counsel for the SISS to in quire what was happening. The answer was that the SISS was going to investigate possible Communist infiltration of the Pacifica Foundation and their stations. Thomas had not been on the original list of those to be called, but as a result of this phone call, he too was subpoenaed. 210 The Board of Directors met in special session on December 28, to consider what course of action they would take in response to this investigation. The decision was a difficult one, for there were many on both the Board and the staffs of the three stations that opposed the right of the SISS or the House Un-American Activities Committee to inquire into a man's private life without the opportunity to face his accuser and put on his own witnesses. Yet, inevitably the licenses of the stations would be threatened by any negative course of action taken by the licensee, Pacifica Foundation. There were two obvious courses of action open; to refuse to co-operate with the committee on the basis of First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech and press, or to give full co-operation to the Committee in its in vestigation in order to preserve the licenses. There was no way to determine, at this point, just how far the investigation might go or where it might lead. There was the possibility the Committee might subpoena the subscriber list and call persons from it to testify, an action that surely would destroy the stations. The Board, after long discussion, decided not to follow either of these courses, but instead to take a middle course. Their statement to the press of January 3? 1963» explained; 211 We do not know what the Senators have in mind, but respectfully remind them that any legislative pressure to curtail broadcasting content is dangerous and unwarranted...The first amendment to the U. S. Con stitution protects freedoms of speech, press, and assembly, not only when legislatures enact laws which abridge those rights, but also when legislative com mittees conduct investigations abridging those freedoms... Radio and television stations have a peculiar problem that does not extend to the press. The press is not licensed! there is theoretically no limit of access to paper and ink. Broadcasting is licensed^ there are a restricted number of channels. Govern ment must act as referee to avoid chaos. Broadcasters on such channels are assumed to justify their licenses through service to the public. These channels cannot be used as private mouthpieces. But government, in its management of the airwaves, must not deny the audience diversity of views espe cially in the fields of public controversy. We might question the propriety of this legislative hearing. However, wc choose not to do so, not be cause we concede the right to compel testimony in these matters, but because Pacifica®s policies and programs are open to everyone. No subpoena is neces sary to secure this kind of information. Those responsible for making and administering Pacifica"s policies will discuss these policies and our programs with anyone, including the Senators. We also, of course, respect the rights of an individual compelled to speak under subpoena to re spond to purely personal questions in the light of his own conscience and understanding of his constitu tional rights.6 The statement also gave a brief background of Pacifica's stations, a list of current Board members and officers, and a list of twenty-four awards won by Pacifica stations. The Board had decided not to issue any statement unless it became necessary, but the San Francisco Chronicle had secured a complete list of those subpoenaed and was

Statement of Pacifica Foundation, January 3, 1963, issued by Trevor Thomas, acting President. "SISS Hearings," pp. 66-69. 212 preparing a story. Thomas decided to issue a statement rather than to allow the papers to speculate.7 When it was publicly announced that Pacifica would be investigated by the SISS, the local reaction was imme diate and indignant. A number of newspaper articles followed the initial news stories, most quoting Thomas fairly completely, or quoting a statement by the American Civil Liberties Union which called the hearings "improper." Later stories concerned Pacifica9s criticism of the fact that the hearings would be closed to all but the members of the committee. A committee formed, calling itself "Friends of Free

Radio," under the chairmanship of S, I. Hayakawa, profes sor at San Francisco State College, to inform the public about the danger of the hearings and to raise money to defray the expenses involved on the part of Pacifica. This group purchased a full-page advertisement in the Chro:dele, January 9? which askeds WHY? Is it because Pacifica devotes 25 per cent to 30 per cent of its air time to news and commentary, has permitted all shades of political opinion to express their views including a handful of Communists and John Birch Society members? Is it because Pacifica broadcast the views of a former FBI agent criticizing the Director and the Bureau? (The Bureau and its supporters were offered equal time.) Is it

^See letter from Thomas to J. G. Sourwine, January 1963> reprinted in SISS Hearings, p. 67. See reprints of representative articles from San Francisco papers, in "SISS Hearings," pp. 2-7. 213 because Pacifica has carried speakers who advocate full civil rights for minorities, which are opposed by Senator Eastland, chairman of the committee"?" Pacifica requested that the hearings be open, and that they be granted permission to tape them for broad cast over their stations. This was refused by Senator Dodd, "to protect innocent persons from unfavorable pub licity as well as to protect the integrity of committee proceedings."10 One of the witnesses, Dr. Peter Odegard, a member of the Board having been president of Reed College, Portland, Oregon, was a close friend of Senator Maurine Neuberger of Oregon. Under the rules of the committee, she was refused admission to the room even while Dr. Odegard testified.11

The Hearings There were three days of testimony, January 10, 11, and 25, 1963. Those testifying during these three days were Dr. Odegard, Trevor Thomas, Joseph J. Binns (manager of WBAI), Pauline Schindler (a Los Angeles sub scriber), Dorothy Healey, Jerome Shore, and Mrs. Gumpertz All but Mrs. Healey and Jerome Shore responded fully to

^San Francisco Chronicle, January 9» 1963» P» 40. "^Telegram from Senator Dodd to Trevor Thomas, January 6, 1963, in "SISS Hearings," p. 142. 1 "L Trevor Thomas, personal interview, Berkeley, July 1, 1969. 214 all questions asked in the hearings. Mrs. Healey, beyond testimony as to her maiden name and her name by virtue of a previous marriage, claimed the protection of the Fifth Amendment to all other questions. Jerome Shore testified that he was not presently a member of the Com munist Party, and had not been a member during the period of the past nine years. He refused to answer any questions about his activities prior to 1954, on the grounds of the Fifth Amendment. He also refused to answer any questions about activities of his former wife, based on the privi lege of marital confidence. However, Senator Dodd ruled at one point that this privilege applied only to what she told him, not to his knowledge about her activities.12 Mrs. Gumpertz, former station manager of KPFK, Los Angeles, testified she had been active in raising funds to put the station on the air in 1959. She also testified that she had been a member of the Communist Party briefly in 1944, shortly after she graduated from the university. She answered all questions about this membership.13 The testimony, later made public, stands as an excellent example of the peculiar nature of all such proceedings. Ostensibly conducted for the purpose of preparing legislation, it would appear that the underlying

12SISS Hearings, p. 19$. "^SISS Hearings, pp. 23S-43. 215 motivation of the Committee's counsel was to produce negative publicity on the basis of tenuous links of Paci- fica officials to "Communist-front organizations" and "known Communists" somewhere in their past. An example would be from the testimony of Dr. Peter Odegard: Mr. Sourwine: I think the record should show some thing of the kind of man you are. Dr. Odegard. You were born in Kalispell, Montana, in 1901. You were educated in the East. You took your Ph.D. from Columbia in 1928? Mr. Odegard: That is right. Mr. Sourwine: Thereafter, and up until World War II, you were employed at various colleges, including Williams, Ohio State, Amherst, and Stanford, teaching political science? Mr. Odegard; Yes. Mr. Sourwine: In 1941, you became a consultant to the Secretary of the Treasury? Mr. Odegard: That is right, in January 1941• Mr. Sourwine: From 1942 to 1945, you were assistant to the Secretary of the Treasury? Mr. Odegard: That is right. Mr. Sourwine: While you were in the Treasury Depart ment, did you know Harry Dexter White? Mr. Odegard: Yes. Mr. Sourwine: Did he have anything to do with secur ing your appointment by the Treasury Department? Mr. Odegard: Oh, no. Mr. Sourwine: You had no duties under him in any sense? Mr. Odegard: No, none whatever, • © e Mr. Sourwine: Are you a member of the North American Committee to Aid Spanish Democracy? Mr. Odegard: No. Mr. Sourwine: Have you been? Mr. Odegard: No. Mr. Sourwine: . . . There was a Peter Odegard who was a member of the North American Committee to Aid Spanish Democracy, the Columbus, Ohio, chap ter, and we had no way of knowing whether it was you without asking. 216 Mr. Odegard: Well, now, wait, I do not remember being a member of that. I was a member of a committee to raise some funds for an ambulance at Ohio State University, but I just do not remember being a member of any such formal body as that. I could have been. Mr. Sourwine: Are you aware, Doctor, that the North American Committee to Aid Spanish Democracy had been cited as a Communist organization? Mr. Odegard: Certainly—I know that now, but I did not know that at the time.

« S 8 Mr. Sourwine: Doctor, are you a member of the Ameri can Committee for Protection of Foreign Born? Mr. Odegard: No. Mr. Sourwine: Have you ever been? Mr. Odegard: I was in the beginning, but when I found —well, I did not like what it was doings I quit. Mr. Sourwine: What was the period of your connection, would you tell us? Mr. Odegard: I do not remember, sir. I think it was maybe a year or two. 900 Mr. Sourwine: Dr. Odegard, is it true that you have publicly stated that Communists should be allowed to teach in American universities? Mr. Odegard: No, I do not think so. Mr. Sourwine: You did not say this? Mr. Odegard: No. Mr. Sourwine: In 1954? Mr. Odegard: I do not remember. I may have been quoting Senator Taft, I think, who may have said that. Mr. Sourwine: Are you the same Dr. Odegard who joined others in fighting the loyalty oath, so-called, required by faculty members at the University of California in the early 1950's? Mr. Odegard: Well, I joined in this—would you like me to explain? Mr. Sourwine: Whatever you wish to say, Doctor. We are seeking facts. Mr. Odegard: I was a member of a faculty group that collected funds to aid those who were dismissed from the university who refused to take this disclaimer, sign this loyalty oath. I may say that none of those had refused to sign an oath of allegiance to the country, which they had all done and they were testing it in the 217 courts, but I was not a member of the group that challenged it in the courts. Mr. Sourwine: Well, you did, as a matter of fact, subscribe to what the university required? Mr. Odegard: I did, yes, without hesitation.14 Although the investigators of the Senate repeatedly said that they were not concerned with the programming of the stations, they asked many questions about who spoke over the station, and who decided who spoke. At one point, Thomas was asked if he knew Mandell had taken the Fifth Amendment in response to a question as to whether he had ever been engaged in sabotage or espionage against the United States. Thomas responded he did not. Senator Doddi . . . assume for a fact that he refused to say when asked under oath, whether or not he had engaged in espionage and sabotage activities against the United States of America. Having assumed it, I now ask you: If it was a fact, would you have allowed hire to broadcast over your facilities? Mr. Thomas: In the absence of any evidence that it was a fact that he had so engaged, the honest answer would have to be yes, I would allow him.15 The hearings also dwelt at length over the arrange ments for broadcasting the National Convention of the Communist Party by WBAI in 1959, and for receiving pro gramming from Radio Moscow. Finally, Thomas was asked to supply from the records of the three stations a great deal of information,

^SISS Hearings, pp. 12-14. "^SISS Hearings, p. 114. 218 including a complete list of taped programs sent to other stations in the United States as well as stations out side the United States during the past two years. Following the hearings, he was asked to supply more infor mation on several occasions: I continue to receive requests for additional information. To date, I have been cooperative and have leaned over backward to be courteous and to supply information to the committee. So far this has cost us nearly $3>000 in direct charges ... and a tremendous amount of time and a secretary's.^ In retrospect, Trevor Thomas has stated: The Senate Investigation was a fraud. They didn't want to talk about our total programming, only carefully selected individuals. The Communists appearing on the stations represented less than two per cent of the total broadcast time. I didn't go with an antagonistic attitude, but as the hearings progressed, I became so ... In retrospect, it was one of the last of the McCarthy-type hearings.!' The Board of Pacifica met again January 19, to hear detailed reports from those who had testified. The possi bility of the SISS issuing a subpoena for the lists of subscribers of the three stations was considered so real that Director Lloyd Smith, of Los Angeles, was elected secretary after volunteering to take custody of the sub scriber lists. Smith, President of the Southern Cali fornia chapter of the ACLU, stated that he would not

1 ftTrevor Thomas, letter to William Harley, Presi dent, NAEB, March 11, 1963. "^Trevor Thomas, personal interview, Berkeley, July 1, 1969• 219 deliver the lists to the SISS, even if they were sought under subpoena.lS

Reactions to the Hearings By far, the most pressing matter at the meeting was how to satisfy the FCC in the matter of the licenses of the station. KPFK was still operating on a Construc tion Permit, KPFA, KPFB, and WBAI were waiting for renewals. In addition, WBAI was on a Construction Permit for a new transmitter. It was certain that the FCC would not act on these matters until the SISS had concluded its investigation, and then the FCC would probably ask further questions of its own. Harry Plotkin, attorney for the Foundation, advised that Pacifica should prepare a statement of policy over programs that would be accept able to both the stations and the FCC. Statements were written and re-written, and then debated at length. All through the spring, the Board devoted the major part of its time to the problem. One of the proposed statements, while not specifying a non- Communist oath, stated; We reaffirm our responsibility to offer our listeners a wide range of opinion in accordance with the American traditions of free speech. There fore, we also reaffirm our established policy that no person who is a member of the Communist Party or who is a member of any other totalitarian or ganization which does not respect this tradition -I cJ Board of Directors, January 19, 1963. 220 and the principles expressed in the Bill of Rights, and no person who adheres to the philosophy and disci pline of such an organization, may serve as a director, officer or staff member in a responsible position of Pacifica Foundation or any of its radio stations.19 This statement, adopted at a special meeting February 2, was rescinded at the next regular meeting, March 12. It had been strongly opposed ty President Thomas; I am strongly opposed to it for the same reason I am opposed to non-disloyalty oaths and general disclaimers—they are of no practical use, and can lead to a demand for proof of the disclaimer, bar no dishonest man and may sorely trouble others ... I would not knowingly hire anyone, including a Commun ists, whose dogma interferes with his duties to Pacifica. The decent and humane answer to the ques tion "Will you hire ?" is "Let me talk to him and I will tell you."20 In the end, none of the statements could command a vote of the majority of the Board, to the approval of the station staffs, who were dead-set against any policy statement. March 1, 1963? Jerome Shore submitted his resigna tions . . . it is my estimate (and hope) that my resignation will serve to unify and in this sense strengthen the leadership to meet the challenge it faces. As matters stand, in my opinion, my presence as Executive Vice- President is a source of embarrassment. . . . The staffs of the stations, especially that of WBAI, expressed their indignation to the Board over the resigna tion, terming it a move under pressure to satisfy the SISS

"^Board of Directors, February 2, 1963. ^Board of Directors, February 2, 1963. Thomas' statement is appended to the minutes. 221 and the FCC. At the meeting of the Board March 12, the matter was discussed with Shore, who stated that his resignation was "not negotiable," but the Board offered him the position of station manager of KPFK, and reluc- tantly, he accepted. 21 The demands of the situation were showing in the resignations of members of the Board of Directors. Five resigned between the March 12 and April 9 Board meeting, all giving personal reasons for their leaving. Included among the five was Dr. Odegard. Transcripts from the hearings were made public July 28, 1963» The San Francisco Chronicle concluded: . . . The report released yesterday only served to show that Pacifica executives and other witnesses actually said what they told newsmen they said at the time of the hearings. It all boiled down to the fact that Pacifica has put Communists on the air, but it's also had broadcasts by members of the John Birch Society and other right-wing organizations.22 On the other hand, the San Francisco Examiner featured the details of the Communist links, reviewing the broadcasts by Communists, and discussing the Communist ties of the officers of Pacifica: And one person who helps determine the broadcasting policy of the stations is a former Communist, while a second was accused by committee counsel of being such. . . . As a result of the Senate inquiry and a

21 Board of Directors, March 12, 1963- 22Testimony Yields Few Surprises," San Francisco Chronicle, July 28, 1963, p. 1. 222 similar one by the Federal Communications Commission, Washington sources predicted last night that the FCC will close down all three stations.23 Jack Gould, columnist in the New York Times, wrote: If it is to be left to partisan politicians to decide whether or not a station is "advancing" or reporting particular causes, whether commentary- meets their notion of a standard of balance, whether identifications suit their fancy, then free speech on the air would be palpably nonexistent. Yet it is of noteworthy interest that because the Pacifica cases do involve in part the principle of free speech for those with whom many may strongly disagree, the most prominent and usually enthusiastic champions of freedom of the airwaves are nowhere to be found. The National Association of Broadcasters has maintained a lofty silencej the coast-to-coast networks, which rush to the barricades over the slightest hint of Governmental intrusion, could not care less and the FCC apparently wishes that the Pacifica issue would just go away.2^- The last sentence of Gould's observations touched on the consideration that had been with the officials of Pacifica from the beginning—how would the FCC react to the situa tion. But for this, they probably would have refused to co-operate in any way with the SISS. But, as Trevor Thomas decided, "Keeping the stations on the air was more 25 important than the principle of non-cooperation." Although the hearings were over, the testimony published, and the press comments made, the greatest

23 "Senate Report on KPFA," San Francisco Examiner, July 28, 1963, p. 1. ^Jack Gould, New York Times, August 3, 1963, Sec. 2., p. 12. 25 Trevor Thomas, personal interview, Berkeley, July 1, 1969. 223 battle of all for the members of the Board of Pacifica raged on—within the organization of Pacifica and the three stations. Thomas and his little band of brothers fought a distinguished and unrelenting flank and rearguard action from both left and right while maintaining a front of tension-controlled relations with the press, public, the Committee, and the FCC, all the while not forgetting to run their stations on an ever diminishing budget ..... The record cannot show the extent of personal vituperation, politicking, and internecine strife that went on within the privileged second story front that houses offices of the Foundation and KPFA, or the winds that swirled over management from its highly vocal outposts in Los Angeles and New York.26 The financial situation, although it had seen a surge of contributions at the time of the hearings, became progressively worse in the fall of 1963. The percentage of renewals fell to its lowest level in years, while it was increasingly difficult to secure new sub scriptions. The stations had acquired the public image as "those stations run by the Communists." Trevor Thomas, who had always been considered "acting President," asked to be replaced at the earliest possible time. Russell Jorgensen, long-time member of the Board took a two-year leave of absence from his position with the Friends Service Committee to assume the Presidency October 1, 1963. Within a week, he was faced with probably the greatest crisis of all.

Robert Schutz, "The Senate Investigation," Berkeley, California, 1967» p. 22 (unpublished manuscript). 224 The FCC Loyalty Oath October 7» 1963> the FCC sent a request to Paci- fica thats Questions have been raised concerning possible Communist affiliation in connection with Pacifica's principals. As an aid in resolving these questions,, the Commission requests that members of your committees of executive members and directors, your officers, and your general managers, answer under oath and sign, before a notary public, the enclosed questionnaire form and submit them to the Commission within thirty (30) days ... 27 The questionnaire reads 1. Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party? If the answer is yes, give dates of memberships 2. Are you now or have you ever been a member of any organization or group which advocates or teaches the overthrow of the Government of the United States, or of any political subdivision thereof, by force or violence? If the answer is yes, list the organization or group and give dates of membership.28 Washington attorney Plotkin had discussed the possibility of some kind of oath or affidavit of loyalty with the Board at least three times since the Senate hear ings, once in the presence of staff representatives. Nevertheless, the request caught both staff and Board by surprise, without a ready course of action.

Pacifica and Oaths. Pacifica had first been con' cerned with loyalty oaths in 1954» when the FCC had

^FCC, letter to Pacifica Foundation, October 7? 1963. 28ibid. 225 proposed that members of Communist Party, a Communist- front organization, or any other organization advocating the overthrow of the government by force or violence would be ineligible for commercial radio operator's license. The Commission also proposed that past member ship in such organizations, or the commission of a felony should be considered in determining whether the applicant for such a license was of "good moral character."29 Pacifica actually filed two sets of comments on the pro posed rule, one by Wallace Hamilton, July 19, 1954, and the other by Lewis Hill, August 30, 1954. Both stated that a political test should not be the basis of judging what persons could operate or appear on a broadcast sta tion, but Hill's comments went further. He argued the purpose of the rule was to insure the proper operation of the Conelrad warning system, and as such the oath proposed would be useless, since persons intent on gaining access to transmitters for the purpose of aiding a hostile attack would have no hesitation about signing such an oath. He proposed an electronic device to be installed in every station's transmitter, permitting instant silencing

^FCC, Docket No. 11061, adopted June 11, 1954, (FCC 54-717). of the station in the event of non-compliance with any Conelrad alert or emergency situation. 30 Inherent in any discussion of the oath proposed by the FCC is the opposition of liberals and pacifists such as composed the staff and officers of Pacifica for such "loyalty oaths." To be sure, to a few, such opposition came from a fear of prosecution after signing because of present or past association with organizations that were now or might in the future be labeled as "communist-front" or "subversive." It did not matter that an individual might sincerely believe in the stated purposes of su.-h a group—membership alone was enough to bring prosecution and normally conviction after such a loyalty oath h~/i been signed. To others, the idea that a government could insure "loyalty" by requiring its citizens to sign a "loyalty oath" was so absurd on its fa.ce that to sign was to participate in intellectual lunacy. However, to most, it was a simple belief that the government had no right to inquire into a man's thoughts and beliefs, particularly his political beliefs of affiliations. Above all others, the issue revolved around this basic belief.

^Comments filed with the FCC regarding proposed rule-making, Docket 11061, by Pacifica Foundation, July 19, 1954, and August 30, 1954. These filings were referred to in the SISS hearings by committee counsel, "SISS Hearings," pp. 128-29. 227 Basis for the FCC Request. The Communications Act of 1934 states: All applications for station licenses, or modi fications or renewals thereof, shall set forth such facts as the Commission by regulation may prescribe as to the citizenship, character, and financial, technical, and other qualifications of the applicant to operate the station . . . and other such informa tion as it may require. [Italics added.!j3J- It should be noted that the request from the FCC was made "as an aid to resolving these questions ...32 clearly falling within the boundaries of the statutory "other such information as it may require," phrase of Section 30$, as well as pertaining to "character" of the license. It should also be observed that the Commission's request was quite different than the "loyalty oath" re- quently used by state or federal government as a pre requisite for employment. In the latter case, the employee who refuses to sign automatically forfeits his chance of employment, and disclosure of past membership in organi zations judged subversive often is a bar to employment. In this case, however, there was no indication of how the Commission planned to use the information sought, and certainly there was no basis to conclude that even if the completed questionnaires should show that several of the officers had been members of subversive groups at soma time in the past, the Commission would conclude that this

^Communications Act of 1934» Section 303 (b). ^2FCC, letter to Pacifica Foundation, October 7» 196 223 would prevent the renewal of the licenses of the station. The Commission is given the task of choosing among applicants in issuing licenses. It issues licenses only to those applicants who the commission finds qualified. In deciding whether the granting or renewing of a license would be in the "public interest, convenience and neces sity," the Commission has been given rather wide powers to require information from the persons who make up the licensee. They can ask whether any of these persons have been convicted of any crime, have been indicted for re straint of trade or anti-trust violations, have filed bankruptcy, or have any unsatisfied judgments against them. They can ask for information about the moral fitness of any persons connected with the licensee, or past business practices of individuals who are applicants. In short, the information the FCC may seek concerning the "character" of a proposed or existing licensee is relatively unlimited. By statute, they are bound to determine that the applicant is of good character, as part of determining that grant ing him a license would serve the public interest. Further, by refusing to answer, the officers of Pacifica were virtually sure to forfeit the licenses. The Commission would refuse to renew the licenses, not on the grounds of Communist affiliation, but on the grounds of failing to supply the information the Commission deemed necessary in order to reach a decision. Any court case 229 following this action would then revolve around the point of refusing information, not of whether one could have been a member of a subversive organization in the past, and still be qualified to hold a license.

The Affirmation. After lengthy discussion, the Board reached a decision. A committee of four was dele gated to discuss the situation with Chairman Henry, inform ing him of the Board's decision to require all Board members and executives to sign statements affirming their support of the Constitution of the United States. TI.e Statement of the Board of Directors, to be given to Chairman Henry read: We recognize the right and duty of a Commission charged with the regulation of broadcasting in the U.S. to assure itself of the good character of those who are responsible for broadcasting to the public. We also recognize that some regulatory instruments are needed by the Commission to obtain the needed information to assure itself that its licensees possess the requisite statutory qualifications. As the Board of Directors of Pacifica Foundation, we take full responsibility for ensuring that the purposes and intentions of the Communications Act and the regulations of the FCC are carried out in practice, and that the policies governing appoint ments to the Board of Directors, its officers and staff are consonant with those intentions. In carry ing out its functions in this regard it is the policy of the Pacifica Board of Directors not to inquire into the political or religious affiliations of its members or allied personnel or to conduct investi gations to that end. With respect to those asso ciated with us, we judge the good character, honesty, loyalty, reliability and commitment to the U.S. Constitution and to the preservation of its institu tions by the quality of their work and through the acts which express the ideas and beliefs which moti vate their lives. Judged by these standards we have 230 full confidence in the integrity, honesty, and loyalty of the members of our Board and management. We do not believe that the signing of an affidavit regard ing membership or nonmembership, past or present, in the Communist Party or other organizations would either add to or subtract from that confidence. In order that the records of the FCC may be complete, we are attaching hereto signed statements by the officers, directors and station managers of Pacifica which clearly and unequivocally affirm their support of the Constitution of the United States, both in spirit and in its formal terms. We believe that these affirmations, coupled with the record of operation of the Pacifica stations, establish qualifi cations of Pacifica Foundation to operate its stations in the public interest.33 From October 7» when the request was received, until November 7» two days before the Board made its decision, there had been no discussion of the request in public. President Jorgensen's first action after receiving the FCC request was to send a memo revealing the request and dis cussing the possible courses of action to Dr. Agnew, chairman of the Board, and to the three station managers. Among other things, he asked (l) that the matter be fully discussed with the staff of the three stations, (2) staff be made to understand that there must be no leaks or press releases on the matter so that both staff and Board would have time to discuss an appropriate response without the pressure of publicity, and (3) all parties refrain from taking positions that they declare in such a way as to be unable to retreat from them. He asked for discussion of

^"Statement3*3 by Pacifica Foundation," adopted by Board of Directors of Pacifica Foundation, November 9> 1963. 231 the pros and cons of possible courses of action without positive statements of position and threats of action, so as to make the ultimate decision, whatever it might be, more easily acceptable to alio 34 A number of Directors and staff members circulated statements advocating possible solutions to the problem. Nearly all deplored the Commission's action in asking for the oaths. Some stated that keeping the stations on the air as a forum for all opinions was more important than the question of signing oaths. Others advocated that those that could, sign; those that could not, resign —in order to preserve the stations. Still others argued that the FCC did not have the right to ask for such oaths, under the First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech and freedom of press. It was also argued that the FCC should ask for full access to FBI files on various persons in Pacifica and make its own determinations from these, but not ask any of the individuals of Pacifica to testify about themselves. Some of the comments advocated refusing to sign in order to test the request in court as to its constitutionality. In the end, however, the Board of Directors again chose a middle ground. The affirmations were viewed as a counter-offer to the Commission, to see how strongly the

•^Russell Jorgensen, memorandum, October 9, 1963. 232 commission viewed the matter. There was strong feeling on the part of the Board that most members of the Commis sion wanted to grant the licenses, if only there could be found a way to satisfy public and Congressional pressures.

Reaction of the Press. By November 7, leaks had begun to develop. A meeting of the Executive Committee, five Directors from the Bay Area who had been given limited emergency powers to respond to the situation, authorized a press relesse, 35 confirming that the FCC had asked members of the Board of Directors and Station Managers to sign an oath as to "whether he is or has been a member of the Communist Party or any other organization advocating the overthrow of the government." The release quoted the language of the FCC letter which declared that the informa tion was sought "as an aid to resolving . . > questions . . . concerning possible Communist affiliation ..." In confirming that no decision had been reached in the matter, the statement quoted Jorgensens "We are wrestling with the problem of how to stay on the air, satisfy our consciences, and meet our obligation to our subscribers." Once the situation became public, the press responded immediately, and with mixed feelings. Most local papers

35"Statement by Pacifica Foundation," press release, November 7, 1963. 233 had little beyond the press release. An article in the

Chronicle, November 8, was headlined, "U.S. Query for KPFAs Are You Red?" and most papers followed in a similar vein. Following the November 9 meeting, another press release was issued, incorporating parts of the Statement drafted for the FCC. Although it did not include the statement denying the effectiveness of the signing of an oath, members of the press quickly confirmed that the Board of Directors had decided to pursue an alternative route. Quickly, columnists and editorial writers took up the pen: Its most passionately held principles are personal responsibility, individual integrity, and total intellectual freedom . . . In the Bay Area, KPFA is our most valuable single cultural asset.36 These radio stations deserve to be judged on the basis of their performance. It has been a good performance, in the best American tradition of controversy—and really just what the FCC asked for. Harassment of these stations may gratify the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee; but it does nothing to promote the public interest or increase the vitality of American broadcasting.37 . . . After all the noble statements about wastelands and the need for more educational and controversial programs, is the FCC going to nullify its preachments by a witch-hunting approach to stations that offer a

^Kenneth Rexroth, "An Oath for KPFA," San Francisco Examiner, November 13» 1963, p. 37. •^Editorial, Washington Post, November 30, 1963» p. A12. 234 place on airwaves for unpopular views? Here is a splendid chance for the new FCC chairman, E. William Henry, to give some meaning to the usual platitudes about freedom of the air . . .3° The meeting with FCC Chairman Henry was arranged for November 14. Pacifica President Russell Jorgenson, Directors Hallock Hoffman, Rudy Hurwich, and Gordon Agnew, and legal counsel Harry Plotkin met with Mr. Henry and two staff members. The statement was described as "most encouraging" by Dr. Agnew. 39 Henry indicated that the Commission might find the statement and affidavits accept able, provided that "three or four" persons in the Pacifica organization would consent to further question ing from the Commission. The delegation from Pacifica responded that if for any reason, any of these persons would not or could not answer such questioning, the Board would completely support such a refusal.^ On November 29, the FCC asked counsel Plotkin to file the Pacifica statement and affirmations of support of the Constitution. The optimism was tempered with the knowledge that Jerome Shore, one of the persons the FCC desired to question, had decided that he would not respond

Editorial, New York Times, November 15, 1963, p. 34. 39R. Gordon Agnew, Chairman, Board of Directors, Pacifica Foundation, Memorandum to Board Members and Station Managers, December 5, 1963. ^Agnew, Memorandum. 235 to questions by the FCC. Also, Director George Probst resigned in protest of the statement that the Board would back any refusal to answer, contending that no such statement had been authorized. At the meeting of December 14, the discussion naturally concerned the action to be taken as to (l) recommendations to those the FCC wished to question and

/ *1 (2) response to those that refused to be questioned. With the full knowledge that Shore did not intend to respond, the question was not an easy one to resolve. However, after much discussion, the following statement was unanimously adopted: ... If the Federal Communications Commission should inquire of any director, officer or employee in respect to his political beliefs or affiliations, this Board asserts its judgment that such questions are inappro priate and irrelevant to a decision by the FCC on the character or qualifications of any licensee, and, while not instructing its directors, officers or em ployees not to answer such question, this Board affirms its support for any such person who refused to answer such questions, and will accept the obligation of seeking to persuade the FCC to modify or withdraw such questions, or, if it cannot so persuade the FCC, it will proceed as necessary to try to preserve its broadcasting licenses.42 Immediately after the adoption of this statement, Jerome Shore resigned from the Pacifica Foundation. He cited several reasons: poor health, his own and the

^Board of Directors, December 14, 1963. ^Board of Directors, December 14, 1963. 236 station's low morale, and his unwillingness to become the I Q sole target of the FCC's investigation. The resignation was accepted with "regret and dismay" according to the minutes of the meeting. Two persons from Pacifica were questioned by the FCC, and both answered questions fully. There was little discussion of this event in the press, although Newsweek carried what was regarded by Director Taylor as a "false account" of the situation: ... it [Pacifica management] has been less than candid in discussing its dealings with the Commission. Apparently, the licensing decision required some Pacifica officials to sign statements that they were not and had not ever been Communists, while others had to make pledges about their loyalty. Yet Pacifica insisted that this "was not a quid pro quo." But at least one official resigned because he could not comply. Meanwhile, the FCC had handed down a decision—to grant all the Pacifica applications, for renewal of licenses and for licensing (from Construction Permits). The decision was issued January 22, 1964. Most of the decision concerned programming, to be discussed next, while only one short paragraph related to the issue of Communist infiltration: Under the public interest standard, it is relevant and important for the Commission to determine in

^Schutz, "The Senate Investigation," p. 5#. ^"Open Channels," Newsweek, February 3, 1964, p. 75. 237 certain cases whether its applicants, for broadcast licenses or radio operator licenses, are members of the Communist Party or of organizations which advocate or teach the overthrow of the Government by force or violence . . .[fifteen citations to law or court decisions] . . . The Commission therefore has followed a policy of inquiring as to Communist Party membership in those radio licensing situations where it has information making such inquiry appropriate. Because of information coming to the Commission's attention from several sources, the Commission requested information from Pacifica Foundation on this score. On the basis of information obtained from Government sources, the Foundation, and our own inquiry, we do not find any evidence warranting further inquiry into the qualifications in this respect of Pacifica Foundation.45 The decision was unanimous.

B. TRANSFER OF CONTROL It will be recalled that in the fall of 1961, the organizational structure of Pacifica was changed by the elimination of the Executive Membership, and changing of the Committee of Directors into the new Board of Directors. Although Pacifica had notified the Commission of this change, no application for consent for a transfer of control was filed with the Commission until the Commission inquired about the situation two years later in response to the pending application for license renewal. It was Pacifica®s contention that no actual transfer of control took place, since the same persons who served as members of the Committee of Directors were elected to the newly

^U.S., FCC, "In re Application of Pacifica Founda tion," January 22, 1964. 238 created Board of Directors, and that control of the Foundation had rested with the Committee of Directors. However, it will also be recalled that the ultimate control of the Foundation rested with the Executive Membership. Although that control was not exercised from the period 1955 to 1961 except in the election of members to the Committee of Directors. However this did not negate the legal structure of the Foundation. The Commission called attention to the important matter of the election of directors—formerly by the Executive Membership, but now by the members of the Board of Directors themselves, and observed; . . . The fact that the legal control vested in the Executive Members did not, in practice, amount to actual control, does not mean that its existence can be ignored . . . On the other hand, it is clear that Pacifica did not. seek to conceal or misrepresent any facts con cerning those who control its affairs, and that the failure to file was an excusable one. We therefore grant the pending application for transfer of control.46 This decision was included in the order of January 22 1964.

C. PROGRAMMING By far, the greatest emphasis in the various investigations by the FCC has been on programming,

^U.S., FCC, "In re Applications of Pacifica Foundation." 239 undoubtedly because this area has produced the greatest number of complaints from the public. When such com plaints are received by the Commissions, it is their prac tice to forward this complaint to the station involved, with a letter requesting comments from the station about the incident. Upon receipt, these comments are placed with the complaint in the station's file. Programming complaints relating to Pacifica stations have concerned two areas % (1) obscene or indecent language, and (2) unbalanced programming or failure to follow the "fairness doctrine" in the presentation of controversial issues. Generally, the Commission has upheld Pacifica in regard to programming complaints, although one incident resulted in a short-term license renewal. These com plaints, Pacifica's responses, and Commission decisions are to be the subjects of this section.

Early History The station Lewis Hill had in mind would be radical in that it would be controlled by those who programmed it—they would be free to experiment, to try new program forms, and to give program content the highest priority. It was to be provocative, controversial, and intellec tually stimulating. These were the goals, not to see how far a station could go toward everyday use of profanity, obscenity, and indecency, yet still retain its license. 240 Hill didn't mind if profanity was aired on the station, if it had a defensible purpose. In 1950, Hill wrote to one of the program producers: I can make it out that I have proposed a censor ship of all but songs with nice words on your pro gram ... It ain't true . . . Herndon sings some fine hefty songs in which profanity is native and I like them. I got a cumulative impression in the series that there were a number of songs, not many-, in which profanity appeared irrelevantly. Items Skip to My Lou. What has "sonofabitch" got to do with Skip to My Lou? The question is inescapable to anyone who already knows Skip to My Lou, and everyone does. . . we are the people who Let Things Be Said on the Radio. We have kicked out the sacred code. No one else has done it. Only we. Obviously we have done so for the integrity not only of folk music but of a large variety of human activities. If a cuss word is the idiom of a folk song, it is good and natural . . .But inherent relevance is vital in all this, and the danger of profanity for its own sake is simply that of a loss of faith.A-7 When Allen Ginsberg first published his book of poetry, Howl, Hill decided against broadcasting the poems, feeling that they were not of sufficient merit. However, later a local bookseller was charged with selling obscene J g literature because he sold the book. The next day, Hill aired the poem, as a protest against the government attempting to decide what was and what was not fit to read.

^Hill, memo to "Jack" (not otherwise identified), February 28, 1950. ^ The bookseller, Lawrence Ferlinghetti, also a poet, figured in a later complaint to the FCC about KPFA programming. ^Mrs. Beverly Ford-Aquino, personal interview, San Francisco, July 6, 1963. 241 Such attitudes were unheard of in commercial radio, but they were defensible in the kind of radio Hill had in mind. Nevertheless, they were not likely to produce the kind of programming that is the standard fare dealt with by the FCC. But on those infrequent occasions when the Commission has dealt with programs using language bordering on "profane" or "indecent" in works of literary merit, it has consistently upheld the right of stations to air such programs. 50

1959 Inquiry The first inquiry by the FCC into programming prac tices of Pacifica stations came as a part of considera tion of an application for a station license in Washington, D.C. in I960. After stating the purpose and objectives of Pacifica Foundation, the application stated: programming will follow out these objectives in much the same manner and with much of the same con tent as has characterized the broadcasts of station KPFA-FM, in Berkeley, California, of which Pacifica is licensee.51 The Commission raised several substantial questions about the financial arrangements for the proposed station,

50See 193$ FCC opinion concerning broadcast of Eugene O'Neill's "Beyond the Horizon" by NBC, Broadcasting. October 15, 193&» p. 22. 51 Application for Construction Permit, for non commercial educational FM station in Washington, D.C., Pacifica Foundation, filed with FCC October 26, 1959> File No. BPED-409. 242 and also, in view of the fact that the station would be programmed similarly to KPFA, raised a question about programming on KPFAs Information has been filed with the Commission alleging that on December 12, 1959 • • • KPFA . . . broadcast a taped program consisting of poetry read ings entitled "Round Table One" and "Round Table Two" which contained material that was vulgar, obscene, indecent, ribald and in bad taste. It is alleged that the above material contained strong implications against religion, government, the President, law enforcement agencies and racial groups.52 Pacifica made a ten-page reply, supplemented by favorable reviews of the station's programming from Time, New Yorker, New York Times critic Jack Gould, Saturday Review's Robert Lewis Shayon, and the Christian Science Monitor. Also included were a transcript of the program of poetry by Lawrence Ferlinghetti, and eight reviews of his book of poetry, Coney Island of the Mind. In its reply to the Commission, Pacifica stated that the tape had been recorded by V/FMT, Chicago, and KPFA had been given permission by that station to broadcast the program. Ferlinghetti was identified as having a well established reputation as a modern American poet, citing the reviews of his work in the exhibits. The reply also denied that the program was obscene or profane, while recognizing;

"^FCC, letter to Pacifica Foundation, January 1&, I960. 243 . . . there is much in literature and poetry which though not obscene or profane may still be offensive to many people . . . Re-examination of the Ferlin- ghetti tape discloses that some passages in it do not quite measure up to Pacifica's own standards of good taste. Pacifica did not review the tape before broadcast as carefully as it should have done because it relied on Mr. Ferlinghetti®s national reputation and also upon the fact that the tape came to it from a reputable FM station. As events turned out, Pacifica was mistaken in not having carefully screened the tape to see if it met its standards. In the future, Pacifica will not rely on other's standards, but will subject all programs to scrutiny to malko sure they meet Pacifica's standards.53 The brief concluded with a statement that the program would not be rebroadcast. No further action was tak^n by the FCC on the matter, although the last sentence in the quotation above was quoted by the FCC in 1965 in ancoher letter of inquiry.

1963 Inquiries As a result of the SISS investigation of Pacifica and its stations in 1963, the renewal of licenses was deferred by the FCC. As a part of the investigation of the Commission at that time, two programming inquiries were sent to Pacifica, in response to complaints abofi four programs broadcast by KPFK, Los Angeles, and on; program broadcast by KPFA, Berkeley. The first inquiry came in March of 1963* just two months after the SIS3 hearings, and asked for information about three programs. They will be discussed in turn.

Pacifica Foundation, Response to FCC Looter of January 13, I960, pp. 9^10. 244 "The Zoo StoryThe first program was a broadcast of the one-act play by Edward Albee. Pacifica President Thomas commented! Albee is a provocative playwright. But "The Zoo Story" goes beyond mere provocation to deal with several of the significant themes of our eras the difficulties of simple communication between people; the barriers erected to avoid emotional involvement? and the confusion of values. This is good, even great theatre. It is unsettling—even frightening, but it is not "vile." It is an honest and courageous play ... I am afraid that some people are able to read filth into any provocative presentation. If the test of suitability of broadcast material is to be the susceptability of some people to look for and read "filth" into it, then only safe, conventional and colorless material will appear on the air . . . Their biases, however, should not be a basis for withholding such broadcasts from the public who can understand and appreciate good theatre.54 The thought of the last two sentences was to be used in the later FCC decision.

"Live and Let Live." This program was a discussion of eight admitted homosexuals. The letter of complaint to the FCC stated: "I was shocked by the very frank dis cussion of their attitudes, experiences, and problems . . . such a program is an outrage against public decency and should not be allowed. Jack Gould's review of the same program, broadcast on WBAI:

"^Trevor Thomas, Pacifica Foundation, "Reply to FCC Letter of March 1&, 1963," pp. 2-3. 55Letter of complaint sent to FCC, quoted in Thomas, p. 3. 245 Last night the discussion of homosexuality was handled with candor and tact on Radio Station WBAI, .... The ninety-minute program was by far the most extensive consideration of the subject to be heard on American radio and it succeeded, one would think, in encouraging a wider understanding of t.u3 homosexual's attitudes and problems.5o Thomas then declared: I fail to see anything offensive about the program Unless we are going back to the days when certain subjects are taboo on the air, I see no reason von.y such programs should not be broadcast. There wt.•• a time when it was thought to be wrong to discuss *• ie problems of venereal disease over the radio. Fortunately, we are beyond that stage . . . Homo sexuality is a fact of lifev whether we like it 'c not. Pacifica conscientiously believes that the American people will be better off as a result o.L hearing a constructive discussion of the problem rather than leave the subject to ignorance and silence.57 Broadcast by a Communist. The third complain'- was in response to a program on which an admitted member of the Communist Party (Dorothy Healey) had discussed t. .e legislative aims of the party. The Commission requested a statement as to the manner in which Pacifica complied with the "fairness doctrine." In response, Thomas first listed the eleven commentators, including Mrs. Healeyf that broadcast on KPFK during the month of February, .963 Peter Charlton, Los Angeles Broker. Dorothy Healey, Southern California Chairman cf the Communist party, a Communist organization. David Hetrick, President of the Los Angeles chap ter of the Federation of American Scientists, and professor of physics, San Fernando Valley State College.

^Jack Gould, New York Times, July 16, 19C2, p 47 57 •"Thomas, p. 5. 246 Hallock Hoffman, Center for the Study of Demo cratic Institutions, Santa Barbara. Phil Kerby, Editor of Frontier Magazine. Marshall Neel, Public Relations Counsel. Marvin Schachter, Former chairman, 42nd assembly district of California Democratic Clubs. Gene Turner, Chairman, Education Committee, Socialist Democratic Federation. Rev. Brooks Walker, Spokesman for the Unitarian Universalist Ministers Association. Caspar Weinberger, Chairman, Republican State Central Committee. Marshall Windmiller, Assistant Professor of International Relations, San Francisco State College, and Co-editor, Liberal Democrat, an independent journal of political news and opinion.5° Asserting that programs by the commentators constituted only a small portion of the public affairs programming of KPFK, Thomas referred to an attached current Folio, stating "One need only read through this program folio to realize the tremendous wealth of diversity that is featured over Pacifica's stations." 59 Not leaving this point to chance, he cited fifty-eight programs or series that had been broadcast over KPFK in the four- month period ending January 6, 1953* concluding: "We at Pacifica are proud of our record of public service. The wealth and diversity of material broadcast by Pacifica

Thomas, pp. 5-6. ^Thomas, p. 6. (Lp. This listing will be found in Appendix B. 247 Foundation should be welcomed by the Commission and the American public . The final two pages of the reply quoted a speech by FCC Chairman Minow extensively, including: Where there have been complaints, the Commission has backed you up, provided that you afforded a reasonable opportunity for the presentation of oppo sition views ... we have repeatedly protected you against those who would water down your convictions through pressure group intimidation . . .62 Thomas concluded; We at Pacifica do our best to present programs that are designed to inform the public ... We realize that there are some who would like to water down our convictions through pressure group intimidation. We ask the Commission to support our stand in this field.63 The second letter of inquiry arrived in April, asking for information about two programs. "Kid" novelist Edward Pomerantz had been presented on a program broadcast by KPFA, in which he read from his unfinished novel. Thomas was more positive in his comments on this program: Prior to broadcast, the tape was auditioned by an employee of Pacifica who edited out two phrases because they did not meet Pacifica's broadcast stan dards of good taste. As will be clear when the tape of the broadcast is monitored, there is nothing

1 Thomas, p. 12. Newton Minow, speech before National Association of Broadcasters, Chicago, April 2, 1963. In Newton Minow, Equal Time, (New York: Atheneum, 1964), p. 24&. ^Thomas, p. 14. 243 obscene, profane, prurient, indecent or vulgar about the reading as broadcast by Station KPFA. It is true that certain minor swear words are used, but these fit well within the context of the material being read and conform to the standards of acceptability of reasonably intelligent listeners.64 Robert Creeley Program. This program consisted of the poet reading twenty-eight of his poems during an appearance before a live student audience at the University of California, recorded by the University. The offensive language was contained in the nineteenth poem, "Ballad of the Despairing Husband," although the other twenty-seven poems were perfectly acceptable. Thomas admitted that the poem in question "does not measure up to Pacifica's own standards for broadcast," contending that it was broadcast in error, through an oversight by the program's producer, who had auditioned the program prior to broad cast without deleting the offensive language. He con cluded "In the future we will pre-monitor tapes—regardless 65 of source—with greater care. "

Decision by the FCC, January, 1964 The Commission's decision relating to these pro gramming complaints was contained in the decision to renew the licenses of all the Pacifica stations of January 22, 1964,—the same decision in which the Commission concluded

^Trevor Thomas, Pacifica Foundation, letter to FCC in reply to inquiry by FCC (undated) ref: 8320, C02-0614, May 21, 1963. ^Thomas, May 21, 1963, p. 4. 249 that there was no evidence of Communist control of the stations. As far as it related to programming, it was a rewarding decision for Pacifica, and perhaps the clearest, Commission statement in a decade relating to a station's freedom to broadcast controversial programs. So far as the program in which Mrs. Healey dis cussed the aims of the Communist party which had motivated a Commission inquiry about how the Pacifica stations maintained "fairness," this warranted only a footnote in the decision: ...we have examined the licensee's overall show ings as to its stations' operations and find that those operations did serve the needs and interests of the licensee's areas. ... In this connection, we have also taken into account the showing made in the letter of April 16, 1963. In concluding that the complaints were about "a few iso lated programs over a four-year period," the Commission stated that normally this finding would be not enough to warrant further inquiry. But, the Commission felt that a detailed response to the issues raised by Pacifica in responding "would serve a useful purpose, both to the industry and to the public."^ Thus, the decision dealt with five complaints, beginning with the Ferlinghetti

^FCC, "in re Applications of Pacifica Foundation," 36 FCC 147, 149 (1964), paragraph 3, footnote. 67Ibid. 250 broadcasts, and including the four remaining complaints referred to above. There is, we think, no question but that the broad casts of the programs, The Zoo Story, Live and Let Live, and The Kid, lay well within the licensee's judgment under the public interest standard. . . . In this case, Pacifica has stated its judgment that the three above-cited programs served the public interests, and, specifically, the needs and interests of its listening public. Here the Commission quoted extensively from Pacifica®s defense of these programs, adding a strong statement of its own about the importance of such programs; We recognize that as shown by the complaints here such provocative programming as here involved may offend some listeners. But this does not mean that those offended have the right, through the Commis sion's licensing power, to rule such programming off the airwaves. Were this the case, only the wholly inoffensive, the bland, could gain access to the radio microphone or TV camera. No such drastic cur tailment can be countenanced under the Constitution, the Communications Act, or the Commission's policy, which has consistently sought to insure the "mainten ance of radio and television as a medium of freedom of speech and freedom of expression for the people of the Nation as a whole" (Editorializing Report, 13 FCC 1246, 124#). In saying this, we do not mean to indicate that those who have complained about the foregoing programs are in the wrong as to the worth of these programs and should listen to them. This is a matter solely for determination by the individual listeners. Our function, we stress, is not to pass on the merits of the program—to commend or to frown. Rather, as we stated (par. 3) it is the very limited one of assaying at the time of renewal whether the licensee's programming, on an overall basis, has been in the public interest and, in the context of this issue, wnether he has made programming judgments reasonably related to the public interest. This does not pose a close question in the cases Pacifica's

68Ibid. 251 judgments as to the above programs clearly fall within the very great discretion which the Act wisely vests in the licensee.69 In examining the Ferlinghetti and Creeley programs, the Commission noted that Pacifica had admitted that errors had been made. But it concludeds The standard of public interest is not so rigid that an honest mistake or error on the part of a licensee results in drastic action against him where his overall record demonstrates a reasonable effort to serve the needs and interests of his community. The Commission thus concluded that the programming issues raised were not sufficient to pose a barrier to the renewal of the licenses of the stations, adding: ... we are charged under the Act with "promoting the larger and more effective use of radio in the public interest" (Section 303(g))» and obviously, in the discharge of that responsibility, must take every precaution to avoid inhibiting broadcast licensees® efforts at experimenting or diversifying their pro gramming. Such diversity of programming has been the goal of many Commission policies (e.g., multiple ownership, development of UHF, the fairness doctrine). Clearly, the Commission must remain faithful to that goal in discharging its functions in the actual area of programming itself.71 After discussing the issues raised about Communist control and transfer of control, discussed here already, the Commission concluded by ordering that the applications of Pacifica be granted.

69?Ibid., paragraph 5. 70Ibid., paragraph 7. 71 Ibid., paragraph S. 252 Reaction to the Decision The decision caused widespread comment in the press, almost entirely favorable to Pacifica. A few selected comments follow: More important ... is the broad sweep of the decision in support of the stations' right to pre sent programs that were not wholly inoffensive or bland j, that might well offend some listeners .... the decision represents political courage and eminent good sense. It should encourage other stations to engage in more "controversial" programming. —Nation'^ The three Pacifica stations, all listener- supported, were trying to provide diverse adult fare. They were making free use of freedom of speech . . . They were offering diversity which presumably the FCC advocated. By emphatically upholding their right to do this, the FCC has encouraged broadcasters to avail them selves of the right to be free, to be unusual, to be controversial, to be provocative.73 —editorial, St. Louis Post-Dispatch The . . . decision ... is a clear victory for freedom of the airwaves. The immediate meaning is that the noncommercial stations, which had been harassed because of their far-out programs . . .will be permitted to continue outspoken and controversial broadcasts for their small but hardy band of listeners. The optimistic, long-range meaning is that the FCC will be standing up with more spine to the pressures-—from within and outside the Government— that brake and block efforts to improve radio, FM and television broadcasting . . . 74 —editorial, New York Times

^"A Good Decision," Nation, February 3? 1964> pp. 110-11. "^Editorial, "Voice in the Wasteland," St. Louis Post-Dispatch, January 29, 1964, p. 20. ^Editorial, "More Choice on the Dial," New York Times, January 24, 1964, p. 26. 253 Criticism was reserved for the conduct of commercial broadcasters? Yet it is noteworthy interest that because the Pacifica cases do involve in part the principle of free speech for those with whom many may strongly disagree, the most prominent and usually enthusiastic champions of freedom of the airwaves are nowhere to be found. The National Association of Broadcasters has maintained a lofty silence 5 the coast-to-coast networks, which rush to the barricades over the slightest hint of Governmental intrusion could not care less . . .75 FCC Chairman Henry repeated the same criticism during a speech at the 1964 national convention of the National Association of Broadcasters, After reminding the broad casters that they had raised a storm of protest when the FCC proposed to issue a rule limiting the number and length of commercials on broadcasting stations—protests framed, for the most part, in "free speech" principles— he contrasted their behavior in the Pacifica case. Which state association sent delegations to Con gress charging that the FCC had deferred the Pacifica licenses for an unwarranted period „ . .Which of you wrote me a letter urging the commission to dismiss the charges and to reaffirm the commission's time- honored adherence to the principles of free broad casting? Where were your libertarian lawyers and their amicus briefs, your industry statesmen with their ringing speeches? If broadcasters felt involved in this issue, there is no evidence in our records to indicate these feelings. Apparently not one commercial broadcaster felt obliged to make his views known to the FCC. When you display more interest in defending your freedom to suffocate the public with commercials than in upholding your freedom to provide provocative

^Jack Gould, New York Times, August 4, 1963, Sec. 2, p. 13. 254 variety in programming, when you cry "censorship" and call for faith in the founding fathers' wisdom only to protect your balance sheet, when you remain silent in the face of a threat which could shake the First Amendment's proud oak to its very roots, you tarnish the ideals enshrined in the Constitution and invite an attitude of suspicion.7°

FCC Inquiries, 1965 Those who thought that the 1964 decision by the Commission would result in the end of complaints about Pacifica programs, and a more co-operative attitude on the part of the Commission were quickly disillusioned. Those who objected to the kind of programming aired by Pacifica had not been awed by the 1964 decision. If anything, the publicity about the case only showed the objectors the kind of harassment that could result from letters of complaint directed to the Commission. During the year 1965, Pacifica was asked by the FCC to file comments about a number of programs. One was a musical recording of "The Ballad of Fanny Hill," aired on KPFA. Another was a series of lectures about sex by Maxine Sterret, author of the controversial Housewife's Handbook on Selective Promiscuity. In a reading of his poems recorded at the 1964 Negro Writers Conference, poet LeRoi Jones used the words "shit" and "fuck," with the result that the FCC asked about their propriety in a broadcast program. An experimental program broadcast

76 ' E. William Henry, speech to the National Asso ciation of Broadcasters, Washington, D.C., April 7, 1964. 255 by WBAI, "Varsity Cheer," included such phrases as "pinched my bare brown titty," "the dirty sons-of- bitches," and "gang-bang," resulting in still another FCC letter of inquiry. Finally, in a broadcast on WBAI Dr. Albert Ellis discussed "wife-swapping" in a program exploring changing moral standards, stating that in many cases it was more desirable than other alternatives. In response to FCC inquiries, a tape of the particular program and comments were sent. On May 2$, 1965, the FCC requested further information about three of the broadcasts % The LeRoi Jones poetry, "Varsity Cheer," and the Ellis "wife-swapping" broadcasts. The letter stated: ...In connection with the last renewal of the licenses of its stations, Pacifica made certain representations to the Commission. Thus, it acknowledged that two poetry readings presented by the stations and containing phrases similar to the above did not meet Pacifica's standards. Specifically, as to the Ferlinghetti readings, you stated that "in the future Pacifica will make its own review of all broadcasts"! with respect to the Creeley passage, that it was an understandable slip-up in the circumstances. . . You further stated that Pacifica "is sensitive to its responsibilities to its listening audience and carefully schedules for late night broadcasting those programs which may be misunderstood by children although thoroughly acceptable to an adult audience."77 Since the Jones program had been broadcast at 9^30 p.m. and the "Varsity Cheer" program aired at 8 p.m. and rebroadcast the following day at 10;45 a.m., the

^FCC, letter to Pacifica Foundation, May 28, 1965. 256 Commission asked for comments about the time of day of these broadcasts. The Commission, in asking for comments about the "wife-swapping" program, noted that adultery is a crime in both California and New York. Pacifica's response cited the merits of the pro grams. Jones was described as "a poet whose standing as a representative of serious Negro protest is recognized widely." The "Varsity Cheer" program "represents a serious attempt to satirize some of the aspects of American mass culture." The "wife-swapping" program was defended as "a sincere effort by a recognized author ity to discuss ... a problem of interest and concern to a substantial segment of the public." The statement then cited a turnover in personnels . . . early in this year there was a substantial turnover in personnel at Pacifica, resulting in a change in the office of President, some of the station managers, as well as lesser personnel. During this period, some of the procedures which had been heretofore adopted by Pacifica were not sufficiently brought to the attention of the new personnel. This has resulted in some deviations from Pacifica's policies and procedures. . . In order to remedy this situation, the Pacifica Board of Directors on April 10, 1965, adopted a written policy statement of procedures.79 The statement closed with a statement defending the right of Pacifica to air provocative programming,

78Hallock Hoffman, President of Pacifica Founda tion, comments to FCC (undated, probably June, 1965). 79Ibid. ' 257 asserting that this would always provoke some complaints to the Commission.

Program Policies, 1965. The statement of policies referred to above had been under consideration through the spring of 1965» being adopted April 10, 1965, by the Board of Directors. It brought together much policy that had been informally evolved at the various stations. However, the statement places ultimate responsibility for programs on the President of the Foundation: As a practical matter, supervision of day to day operation of each station is exercised by the sta tion manager, but this delegation does not relieve the President of his responsibility to the Board. Station managers may delegate either to program directors or to program producers of performers that degree of authority and responsibility required . . . No such delegation, however, relieves the manager of his responsibility to the President for every broadcast that is made at his station. The policy requires approval by the station manager before a word or phrase regarded in ordinary usage as profane, obscene, or indecent can be included in a pro gram to be broadcast. Such approval is contingent upon: (a) necessity for the artistic integrity of a work of literary art, or (b) so characteristic of a particular ethnic or social class that it would be impossible to remove the word or phrase without misrepresenting the persons appearing on the pro gram, or (c) so intimate a part of the situation being dealt with by a public affairs program that

go Pacifica Foundation, "Program Policy" (adopted by Board of Directors, April 10, 1965), p. 1. 253 - the character of the situation would be grossly misrepresented by omitting the word or phrase. Approval of the use of any such language is to be re ported in writing to the President of the Foundation. Presentation of any subject matter involving discussion of attitudes violating general standards of respectability, such as sexual behavior, requires the approval of the station manager. If, in his opinion, such broadcast is likely to "cause rational listeners to complain to the FCC," the decision is to be referred to the President, who may approve the broadcast "solely on the ground that it makes a sufficient contribution to public understanding to warrant risk of the station's license to broadcast," 32 The policy provides that each tape is to bear the signed approval of a responsible program director, producer, or station manager; and that no program will be broadcast unless such approval appears on the tape box. The writing of such a policy was contradictory to the principles of many of the members of the Board of Directors. President Hoffman observed: I am astonished to find myself writing policies that are to restrict freedom of speech—even, as we say around the university, filthy speech. Our

^Ibid., p. 2. a2Ibid.. p. 2. 259 morale problem is to make the statements simple and relatively unpunitive. Our FCC problem is to make them serious, intelligible, and credible. Our operational problem is to make the procedure workable. These policies were made necessary by the refusal of the staff of the stations to take seriously the cau tions and persuasions of the management. Many on the staff felt the stations should stand for free speech— completely free speech, which would permit radio pro gramming following the increasingly tolerant standards of books, magazines and motion pictures. The slogan "Support Amendment One" from the SISS affair, was now interpreted to mean programming should go beyond the apparent limits of the FCC, even if this meant a court battle to preserve the stations' licenses. Pacifica staff secretary Vera Hopkins, from her office at KPFA in Berkeley wrote to Hoffmans I think we are in for very hard times. I have yet to talk to anyone at the station [KPFA] who takes the FCC complaints seriously on any basis and thinks there is any basis at all for caution. The prime reaction is that none of the programs in question has anything at all wrong with it. And we ought not to delete things because the FCC questions our right to broadcast them. . . .

Short-Term Licenses to Pacifica The licenses of KPFA and KPFB in Berkeley, and KPFK, Los Angeles, came due for renewal in December

^Hallock Hoffman, letter of April 1, 1965. ^Vera Hopkins, letter of March 11, 1965. 260 of 1965. On a split vote (4-3) the Commission gave these stations a "short-term renewal" for a period of one year, rather than the usual three, citing the failure to exercise adequate supervision over program ming. The text of the Commission's letter is as follows: As you know, the Commission has received a number of complaints during the past year regarding pro grams broadcast by Pacifica stations. These com plaints have raised questions as to whether you have conformed to your own program supervisory policies and procedures on which the Commission relied in granting your prior renewals. When requested to comment on these complaints, you replied that because of changes in personnel earlier this year, there had been "some deviations from Pacifica's policies and procedures," and that in order to remedy this situation, your Board of Directors had on April 10, 1965, adopted a state ment of program supervisory policies and procedures which was attached to your response. . . . Although it would appear that you are now opera ting in accordance with your stated supervisory policies, because of your admitted failure to con form to these policies at certain times during the current license period, we are granting renewal of the licenses of stations KPFA, KPFB, and KPFK for a period of one year from December 1, 19650 At the end of this period, you will be afforded the further opportunity to demonstrate adherence to your program supervisory representations.^ Chairman Henry and Commissioners Lee and Loevinger wrote in their dissenting statements The issue here turns on whether a one-year renewal is called for because of Pacifica's failure to con form entirely to its program supervisory procedures. We believe that full renewal is in order. The fail ure with respect to the Pacifica stations before us is an isolated one . .

^FCC, letter to Pacifica Foundation, December 12, 1965. 86 Ibid., dissenting statement. 261 Although it was small comfort to those at Pacifica during the same week, the FCC had issued short-term renewals to five commercial radio stations for exceeding the number of commercials per hour promised in their last applications. $7

Complaints, 1966. The action of the FCC had an effect of emphasizing to the staff that there was a need for responsibility in programming. During 1966, the only complaints from the FCC were those that could be forcefully answered on the basis of program content or free speech. In January of 1966, several copies of programs broadcast from North Viet Nam were anonymously sent to KPFK, Los Angeles. The programs called "Radio Stateside, were aimed at U.S. troops and designed to discredit the American Government. Station officials contacted the FBI, who conducted an investigation of the incident. After getting FBI clearance, the station broadcast parts of the programs, with announcements before, after, and during the tape explaining the nature of the program material. Nevertheless, a listener filed a complaint with the FCC, who, in turn, asked Pacifica for comments. The station responded that the tapes were "rendered

'"Crackdown on Commercialization," Broadcasting, December 20, 1965» p. 27. 262 newsworthy after nationwide publicity," and referred the Commission to the FBI for further information about the incident. In May, the Commission inquired about a program broadcast by WBAI, New York, featuring a speech by Wally Butterfield, an official of the Ku Klux Klan, charging that the national television networks were con trolled by "international Jewry," and as such, a part of the international plot to sell out the country to the Communists. A listener complained the program was anti- semitic., and treated the heads of the networks unfairly. Pacifica responded: It was programmed to prove more forcefully than any commentary could that the complacency of many listeners with regard to progress being made in the civil rights movement is not entirely justified. ... an excellent example of a type of thought which is espoused by a significant minority of people in the United States.°° Later in the summer, the FCC passed on a complaint that the stations had broadcast a speech by Nguyen Van Luy advocating the "Four-Point Program of the N.F.L." Pacifica responded by citing the number of pro-adminis tration speakers who had appeared on the station in the past three months, specifically citing the speech by Ambassador Goldberg which had been broadcast in its

Response to FCC letter of May 27, 1966, undated. 263 entirety three times in prime listening hours. The

N.F.L. Speech had been in direct reply to Ambassador

Goldberg's speech. The Commission responded to the listener that the licensee (Pacifica) had adequately fulfilled its responsibilities in this instance.

In December, a listener complained of a program which was "vile and vulgar," especially in its use of language, and the FCC asked for comments. Pacifica responded about the play, the Broadway cast recording of

"Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?"

. . . certainly one of the most important plays of this decade, if not this century. . . .The language of the play is considerably milder than any adult and most children hear daily on the street or in the home. Albee's function as a playwright is partially to make us aware of this sort of tawdry vulgarness . . . [through] the power and violence of Albee's diatribe against just such behavior.°9

License Renewals

WBAI received a regular renewal of its license

September 7» while the West Coast stations were granted

renewal March 22, 1967> for the remainder of their normal license period.

Complaints Since 1967

Since the spring of 1967( the volume of complaints to the FCC about programs aired by the Pacifica stations

^Paul Dallas, Station Manager, KPFK, response to FCC Inquiry of December 20, 1965> submitted January 16, 1967. 264 had eased slightly, but still continues at a steady pace. As has been the case during the last decade, most of the complaints come from listeners in the New York or Los Angeles areas. In 1967? the FCC sent four letters of inquiry about Mew York programs and two concerning Los Angeles programs. The following year there were again four about WBAI and three about Los Angeles. Thus far in 1969, complaints have largely centered about WBAI, New York. For the most part, complaints during these years have been similar to those already discussed, so with several exceptions, it would be redundant to discuss each in detail. Therefore, only four complaints from this period will be discussed in detail.

Arlo Guthrie Recording. A recorded song, "Alice's Restaurant," sung by Arlo Guthrie, was the subject of a listener's complaint about WBAI. Pacifica responded to the FCC inquiry; Since the phrases quoted in the complaint are not themselves obscene, I suspect that the complainant is actually offended by the general content of the song, which is a strong political statement, specifically in opposition to the military draft. I think this complaint assays political censureship in the guise of a concern for language.90 This letter illustrates the shift in Pacifica strategy in responding to the FCC that became increasingly

^Frank Millspaugh, Jr., Station Manager, WBAI, letter in response to FCC inquiry, December 11, 1967. 265

evident in the fall of 1967. Perhaps this shift was

triggered by Hoffman's memo;

...I am tired of responding to the FCC complaints as if we owed them something. They owe us a lot. We are trying to preserve free broadcasting for them. They would have trouble doing it without us.91

Increasingly, the responses to the FCC were more positive

about the rights of Pacifica to broadcast provocative

programming. Equally obvious was the questionning of

the motives of those who complained. There were frequent

references to commercial programs using the double

entendre type of humor in risque situations, such as

"Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour," and later "Rowan and

Martin's Laugh-In."

Documentary Language. Another FCC inquiry that

should be discussed concerned the documentary aired by

WBAI following the assassination of Martin Luther King.

The documentary was produced from tape recordings made

at a mass rally held following the slaying of the Negro

leader, containing frank expressions of hate and frus

tration uttered by those in attendance. Pacifica

commented:

We know that our listenership is predominantly white. Therefore, we believe that we performed the best possible public service by allowing the white community to learn of Negro reaction to

^"Hallock Hoffman, President of Pacifica Founda tion, memorandum, September 29, 1967. 266

Dr. King's assassination directly, without sugar- coating it. Under the circumstances, we did not feel that we should tamper with the speakers' expressions of grief and anger. We do believe the program was a powerful one which merited air time . <,

FCC Responds to Complainant. In the fall of

1968, a complaint was sent to the FCC about a dis cussion program which the listener stated was derogatory towards both Vice President Humphrey and Pope Paul.

After asking for comments from Pacifica about the program the Commission, quoting the language of an earlier decision, defended Pacifica's right to air such program ming in a letter to the complainant; The public interest is best served by permitting the expression of any views that do not involve "a clear and present danger of serious substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience, annoyance or unrest." ... if there is to be free speech, it must be free for speech that we abhor and hate as well as for speech that we find tolerable or congenial.93

License Renewals, 1969

When the Berkeley and Los Angeles stations made application for regular renewal of their licenses in the fall of 1963, the Commission again delayed announcing the renewals, causing some concern on the part of

^Millspaugh, response to FCC inquiry of April 26, 1963, undated (in KPFA files).

^FCC, Memorandum Opinion of June 17? 1966, re KTYM, Inglewood, California, as quoted in FCC letter of September 23, 1963, to Edward J. 0'Conner. 267 Pacifica officials. However, the decision of the Com mission to grant the licenses, announced three months after the normal date, quoted the 1964 decisions We recognize that as shown by the complaints here, such provocative programming as here involved may offend some listeners. But this does not mean that those offended have the right through the Commission's licensing power, to rule such program ming off the airwaves. Were this the case, only the wholly inoffensive, the bland, could gain access to the radio microphone or TV camera.94 The Commission added that it believed the reasoning of its earlier decision was equally applicable to the pre sent application, commenting "There can be no doubt that the stations provide a unique and well-received program ming for a sizeable segment of the population in the areas they are licensed to serve. 95 Once again, the Commission firmly backed the programming policies of Pacifica—the right to present all opinions.

Anti-Semitic Charges, WBAI, 1969 Following a program discussing the occurrence of feelings of anti-semitism among blacks, including the reading of poetry illustrating such feelings, a

^FCC decision re Applications of Pacifica Founda tion January 22, 1964, as quoted in FCC decision re Pacifica Foundation, February 23, 1969. ^FCC decision re Pacifica Foundation, February 26, 1969. 263 complaint was filed with the FCC by Dan Sanders, of the United Federation of Teachers of New York City, charging that the program was "patiently anti-semitic." As is the usual practice, the Commission asked WBAI for comments about the program. After receiving WBAI's comments, the Commission wrote a Memorandum Opinion about the case, addressed to Mr. Sanders, summarizing their conclusions about the programs. This procedure is usually reserved by the Commission for cases involving precedents or cases having to do with matters relevant to the broadcasting industry as a whole. In the introductory paragraph of the statement, the FCC noted that this and another similar program had resulted in "many other complaints to the Commission, . . . because of material pointed out as being anti- semitic. The program in question carried poetry such ass Hey, Jew boy, with that yamulka on your head You pale-faced Jew boy—I wish you were dead. I can see you Jew boy—no you can't hide. I got a scoop on you—yeh, you gonna die. I'm sick of your stuff, every time I turn 'round, Your pushing my head deeper into the ground. I'm sick of hearing about your suffering in Germany I'm sick about your escape from tyranny I'm sick of seeing in everything I do About the murder of six million Jews. Hitler's reign lasted for only fifteen years,

96FCC, Memorandum Opinion re WBAI, to Don Sanders, March 26, 19o9, p. 1. 269 For that period of time you shed crocodile tears, My suffering lasted for over 400 years, Jew boy Then you came to America, land of the free And took over the school system to perpetrate white supremacy . . .97 The poem was dedicated to Albert Shanker, head of the teachers® union involved in the school strike in New York in the fall of 1963, a dispute involving ethnic overtones. During the discussion, one of the participants expressed a view somewhat similar to that of the poem, although the host stated several times that this should be interpreted as representative of the feelings of only a portion of the black community. Pacifica®s response pointed to a series of pro grams exploring the antagonisms of blacks for Jews, as well as a number of programs dealing with the total spectrum of civil rights, race relations, black attitudes and culture and Jewish attitudes and culture. A state ment by Robert Goodman, President of Pacifica addeds Our answer is that the practice of freedom of expression, the process of full discussion, open to all, involves some risks to the society that practices it. But the stakes are high and the risks must be run.98

•^Thea Behran, "Anti-Semitism," as quoted in FCC Memorandum Opinion, March 26, 1969, p. 1-2. 7 Robert Goodman, statement included in response to FCC by Pacifica Foundation, March 12, 1969. 270 In the seven-page opinion, the Commission con cluded that the broadcasts did not contain specifically prohibited material (such as obscene language or lottery information), and as such, was protected by the rights of the First Amendment. Quoting the KTYM Opinion (referred to on page 266), the Commission stated that its concern was thus limited to determining whether the requirements of the "fairness" doctrine had been met. Its conclusion on this point was "... there is no question but that the licensee is affording reasonable opportunity for such presentation as to the issue here involved."99 Commissioner Johnson added a separate concurring statement which is of great interest to this study, since it summarizes well the philosophy of the Pacifica stations. At the same time, the fifteen-page statement is a pointed indictment of the commercial broadcasters of the United States. On the second page, Johnson takes up the issue of the cancellation of the "Smothers Brothers" program by CBS. Quoting the network statement that the program was cancelled because "An entertainment program is not a proper forum for social comment," Johnson disagrees; Hasn't 'feocial comment" been part of entertainment since the beginning of time? Wasn't it the stuff

"ibid., p. 7. 271 of which the troubador's songs were made? Hasn't it been the raw material of a Will Rogers or an Art Buchwald? Of course. Aren't we therefore left with the conclusion that the only kind of "social comment" that is unfit for television is that which involves, in Mason Williams' phrase, "The unpopular opinion, or anything with teeth"? For Bob Hope's commentary about the Viet Nam war seems fully acceptable to the networks. And so do other enter tainers' critical observations about protesting college students, or gun control legislation. It's not the subject, it's what you say about it. And it's not even how unpopular your views may be—it's who finds them unpopular. . . . The ideas and life styles endorsed and surveyed by American television are truly "popular" only with those Americans fortunate to be native-born-white-Anglo-Saxon- Protestant-suburban-dwelling-middle-class-and- over-thirty. Of course this is censorship pure and simple.100 His point is that the networks exercise a flagrant censorship over what is broadcast in this country, not the FCC. He cites the present case as an illustration of this point, "because the policies involved in the WBAI ruling are vitally important to the problems of broad casting in a free society." Johnson asserts that the guarantees of free speech contained in the First Amendment operate on two levels— the public level and the individual level. On the public level, it operates through government to assure the "widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources."101 The Commission

"^^Nicholas Johnson, Separate statement in FCC opinion res WBAI, March 26, 19o9» p. 3. 101 From the decision in Associated Press v. United States, 326 U.S. 1, 20 (1944). 272 has attempted to preserve this diversity of views, according to Johnson, through (l) diversity of owner ship, (2) use of the "fairness" doctrine, and (3) re fraining from "any attempt to censor the provocative programming content of a license." Under the discussion of this last point, Johnson reviews the operation of the Pacifica stations, stating that "This Commission should be particularly reluctant to impose restraints upon the programming of a station so actively sponsored by its listener community." Observing that WBAI broadcast 263 different programs in a two-year period specifically dealing with civil rights, racism, race relations, and attitudes of black citizens, as well as ninety programs relating to Jewish affairs, culture, and history, he concludes: . . . the diversity of views and opinions in radio and television is dependent almost entirely upon the initiative of the individual broadcaster. When that initiative is exercised, as it often has been exercised by WBAI, the Commission should be the last to stifle it. . . .Dissention and strife are better uncovered and exposed to public views than left to smolder in silence and darkness ... I do not believe that the goals of a democratic society are ever served by the suppression of views."102 Discussing the application of First Amendment guarantees on the individual level, Johnson cites evi dence that the black community has little access to the

1Q2Ibid.. pp. 10-11. 273 mass media, especially for the discussion of their problems as opposed to reports on riots or disturbances after-the-fact. Quoting a comment by Broadcasting maga zine terming WBAI "more an electronic soapbox than an organ of electronic journalism,"103 Johnson responds that the country needs many more such soapboxes "for those citizens who have been deprived of an "effective® voice to communicate with their fellow citizens." He compares WBAI to the New England town hall meeting, saying the latter represents "one of the oldest and most important of democratic traditions—the right of the individual citizen to stand up and speak out in public." Turning to the commercial broadcasters' role in defending freedom of speech, Johnson observes: In the light of the significance of the WBAI concept and its importance in First Amendment terms, it is a little surprising that the station has such few supporters. One would think that the staunchest advocates of freedom of speech in the broadcast media of radio and television would be found among the traditional spokesmen for the broadcasting industry. Unfortunately, this is far from true.104 Observing that the broadcasting industry seems to "raise the banner of *free speech'" only on those occasions when some action of Congress or the FCC threatens the

103 Question of Responsibility," editorial, Broadcasting, February 10, 1969» p. 83. 1Q^Ibid., p. 17. 274 profits of the industry, Johnson quotes Chairman Henry's speech deploring the lack of broadcaster support for -i rj c Pacifica when its licenses were in jeopardy in 1964. He then took Broadcasting magazine to task for suggesting in an editorial that WBAI had gone beyond constitutional guarantees of free speech in the anti-semitic broad casts, while on the same page protesting FCC proposals to prohibit the airing of cigarette commercials. Johnson observes; The lesson to be drawn from this performance is clear; if the individual citizen wishes to protect his First Amendment freedom of speech over the broadcast media, he would be well advised not to look for support to the broadcasting industry. He may find to his unhappy surprise that the industry has taken up firm positions in the enemy camp and is far more interested in censoring from the public air those views it finds economically or personally distasteful.1^6 Calling attention to the thousands of dollars spent each week by the Television Information Office promoting "its version of freedom of the press," he deplores the fact that broadcasters contributed not one cent to assist WBAI or other Pacifica stations defend their right to present diverse views in radio programming. Johnson's concluding paragraphs applaud the pre sent decision:

"^''See page 254. 106Johnson, p. 19. 275

The Commission's decision to take no further action regarding the WBAI complaints is a strong reaffirmation of the principle that all facts, opinions and insights, however distasteful to some, must be brought to the public's attention before social problems can be adequately resolved. If anti-semitic sentiments exist among portions of New York's population, then no valid social purpose can be served by suppression of this important fact« e • o I support the Commission's disposition of the WBAI complaints, and hope that this statement may add up to an understanding of the threats of censor ship in our country today, the position of the FCC, and the significance of this decision.-^-0'

This statement by Commissioner Johnson, as well as the opinion of the full Commission, are the latest in a series of strong supporting decisions and state ments defending the right of Pacifica stations to pre sent a wide range of opinion covering virtually all social problems. Johnson's statement was encouraging because it expressed so forcefully the principles that underlie the broadcast philosophy of the Pacifica stations; free speech for all, no matter how controver sial the speaker or subject; searching for solutions to the problems facing society through discussion; and faith in society's ability to make good decisions when it is fully informed.

CONCLUSIONS

The Pacifica stations are dedicated to presenting the widest range of opinions about social problems, as

107Ibid., p. 23. 276 well as the works of creative contemporary artists.

The carrying out of either of these goals is difficult enough as it stands. When one adds the effect of changing contemporary standards in acceptable language to such programming, he becomes impressed not with the number of complaints about Pacifica programs, but with the relatively few complaints in view of the great numbers of programs in these areas presented by Pacifica.

It is interesting to note that although large numbers of programs are exchanged among the Pacifica stations, very few complaints from the San Francisco area are received by the FCC. Perhaps this is due to the higher tolerance of residents of this area, repre sented by the emergence of the "hippie" culture and the "topless" nightclub. On the other hand, it also may be true that the Berkeley station, being the oldest of the Pacifica stations, has also become more conserva tive, relatively, than the other two stations. The present study however did not provide a basis on which to make such judgments.

Pacifica's pattern of responses to FCC inquiries about programming resulting from listener complaints has moved through three clearly recognizable phases.

The first was the prevalent industry practice—the posture of admitting that mistakes had been made, while promising to correct such errors in future operation. 277 This was successful for a time, but the continuing com plaints to the Commission soon precluded the use of this position. This was evident in the FCC letter of May, 1965, asking how certain broadcasts were consistent with earlier representations. The next pattern of responses was as brief as it was unsuccessful. The letter of June, 1965, citing the turnover in station officials in key positions as a factor in questionable programming, was a disasterous position to take before the Commission. It acknowledged a serious lack of licensee responsibility for broadcast programs, due to a lack of clear-cut supervision of the station operations. The short-term licenses were the result of such failures. However inconvenient the short-term licenses may have been, the action had a strengthening effect on Pacifica as a whole. No longer could staff members maintain the FCC "won't really do anything." The action demonstrated that the FCC was prepared to take whatever action necessary to insure that programming on the stations would be serious rather than sensational, and that departures from norms of acceptable language or topics of discussion would be made for justifiable pur poses rather than whims of station personnel. As a result, procedures within the stations were tightened, 278 and policy clearly established where before it had been hazy.

This brought the third phase. Given greater confidence by the clarity of the newly developed and established programming policies, Pacifica"s responses to complaints have taken on a maturity and positiveness that constantly call attention to its mission. Rather than apologetic tones, replies now ring with defenses of the right to air unpopular opinions from any source or contemporary literature of merit, even though it may include language not normally heard on radio. This pattern of response has been highly successful with the Commission.

Summary

Increasingly, during the last decade, Pacifica stations have been targets of those who disagree with their policy of presenting opinions of all viewpoints or of airing contemporary literature containing frank expressions. Some of these persons have sought to harass the stations by filing complaints about Pacifica programming with the Federal Communications Commission.

With the exception of those complaints dealing with obscene or indecent language, the Commission con sistently has upheld the programming policies of the

Pacifica stations. In the areas of acceptable language, 279 Pacifica at times has been far more responsive to chang ing contemporary standards than has the FCC, although at other times, complaints resulted from the lack of clear-cut programming policies. The short-term license renewals for the West Coast stations resulted from this lack of agreement about programming policies within the structure of the stations. In recent years, policy in the area of acceptable language has been more clearly established, with the result that fewer complaints have been filed with the Commission in this area. As a result, Pacifica has been able to defend its programming judgment to the degree that it has elicited considerable support from the FCC for its overall programming. CHAPTER VIII

PACIFICA STATIONS IN THE SIXTIES

In the two preceding chapters, organizational problems extending into the sixties and FCC inquiries during the early sixties were examined. This chapter will examine other aspects of operation of the Pacifica stations, especially KPFA, during this period.

A. THE UNION AND THE STRIKE Internal pressures had been growing throughout the latter part of 1963 as debate raged about the han dling of the SISS hearings. Trevor Thomas, who had always used the title "Acting President," but who had held the post since the resignation of Hal Winkler in September, 1961, now made it clear to the Board that he would not continue to serve both as Manager of KPFA and Acting President. He had guided the Foundation through an intensive investigation by the SISS, participated in the hearings, and met with the Board innumerable times in special session during the crisis. Russell Jorgensen, a long-time member of the Board, agreed to assume the position of President for two years and took office

280 281 October 1. He was granted a two-year leave of absence from his position with the American Friends Service Committee in San Francisco to take the position as head of Pacifica Foundation. Within a week of his assuming office, the FCC requested the "oaths" from all Pacifica officials, as was described in the previous chapter. The pressure of these two external crises in 1963 contributed signifi cantly to the building internal stresses within the organization. To say that there were differences of opinion within the station about the best handling of the FCC request would be to understate the case. These differ ences were intense, passionately held positions of principle, generating fierce antagonisms between groups. What was probably a majority of the staff of KPFA present ed a memorandum with nine signatures to the Board, strongly opposing the "oath" requirement: We affirm that whether or not the action of the FCC is constitutional is the proper business of Pacifica. We feel that the case should be deter mined by the courts, not by the FCC. . . . We do not see how this matter can, ultimately, be divorced from programming policy.1 The Public Affairs Director, Elsa Knight Thompson, also submitted an individual statement:

"'"Memorandum to Board of Directors, October 17, 1963 (in Pacifica files). 282

I do not think signing would ensure our survival, it would simply be one step on the road to certain defeat. I do not believe that refusing to sign would ensure our defeat. I am not convinced that such a refusal would necessarily mean the with drawal of our licenses. It is therefore my opinion that we should refuse to sign and take our case into the courts if the licenses are refused.2

In spite of these strong expressions, and similar

ones from the other two stations, especially WBAI, the

Board decided that it could not risk refusing to make

some response, and the affirmation was agreed upon as

a course of action. This was not well-received by the

staff, especially by Mrs. Thompson, who was quite critical

of both Trevor Thomas and Russell Jorgensen for their

part in the decision.

Following Jerome Shore's decision to resign rather than submit to questioning by the Commission, many staff

members charged that he had been forced to resign by the Board's refusal to support him. On the other hand, members of the Board believed they had been quite clear

in indicating that the decision to be questioned or not was that of the individual, and that full support would

be given to any person who decided against testifying.

In view of the fact that Shore had been in ill health

most of the year, and had attempted to resign in March,

only to be dissuaded by the Board, leads this researcher

^Letter to Board of Directors, October 17, 1963. (In Pacifica files.) 2#3 to favor the interpretation of the members of the Board. However, for the moment, the most relevant point is that the differing interpretations created more distrust between the staff on the one hand and on the other, the Board, Jorgensen, and Thomas. As President Jorgensen left for Washington to consult with the FCC, a meeting that produced the ulti mate resolution of that crisis, Mrs. Thompson presented him with a "Proposed Station Structure" signed by nearly all the department heads of the three stations, a total of eleven persons. The basic tone of the proposal was that department heads should have "full responsibility" for the operation of their departments, while the sta tion manager was to be "ultimately responsible for all aspects of a station's operation," yet "His responsibility is administrative, not supervisory." 3 Another provision was that all program producers and programs produced were to be under the responsibility of one of the department heads, precluding the "independent" pro gram producers, who reported directly to the station manager. Finally, the proposal precluded "hiring and firing of department staff members without the consulta tion and agreement of the department heads

3"Proposed Station Structure" signed by eleven department heads of Pacifica stations, undated, but pro bably November, 1963, (in Pacifica files). ^Ibid. 234

This proposal reflected an organizational diffi culty discussed in the previous chapter, the lack of strong authority on the part of the station managers and the excessive concern of the staff for the proper ways to achieve the goals of the station, to which all were strongly dedicated. Without clear-cut authority, the station manager was reduced to suggestions and attempts to secure consensus, only to be met, quite often, by even renewed debate. In any organization, there comes a time when the chief officer must say, "Look, I have heard your arguments, and there are some valid points. However, I am responsible for the success or failure here, and in my best judgment, I cannot agree.

Therefore, we will do it my way." With the pre-occupation of the top officials of Pacifica with the SISS and the

FCC "oath" the time for this speech regarding the pro gramming of KPFA had long passed by the end of 1963.

Of particular importance was the growing dissatis faction of both Thomas and Jorgensen with the Public

Affairs programming produced under Mrs. Thompson's direc tion. Thomas felt;

The two people [in Public Affairs] at KPFA have been Elsa Knight Thompson and Burton White. Both have produced some good and exceptional programs, but almost always in a predictable area. This kind of orthodoxy is comparable to prying open a clam to ask for new ideas. I do not mean to ex clude program ideas but to expand them. Nor do I, 235 and many of the people who work hardest around here, want a KPFA forever hinged to a posture that was valid thirty years ago. . . .5 Jorgensen later was more explicit about his view; . . . many persons came to see me to complain about the conduct of Elsa Knight Thompsonlisteners insisted her on the air programming was narrow and that she was an increasingly poor interviewer be cause she sought to discredit persons she did not agree with and to help persons with whom she agreed, ex-staff and volunteers charged that she could not suffer a [staff or volunteer] who disagreed with her . . . she would not accept program suggestions or direction from the Manager and Program Director5 she attacked those persons who were assigned by the manager to make up for her programming lacks." The last statement refers to the "independent" program producers which the department heads sought to eliminate. Finding programs in some areas ignored, even after repeated requests for their production, Thomas had resorted to supervising their production himself, outside the Public Affairs Department with producers (mostly volunteer) reporting directly to him. Mrs. Thompson correctly interpreted this as an attempt to by-pass her authority, and resented it bitterly. On the other hand, Mrs. Thompson had been some what active in the formation of a union for the employees of KPFA, although it is clear that the actual organizing was done by others. Both Thomas and Jorgensen felt that

Trevor Thomas, Statement to Subscribers, March 23, 1964. £ Russell Jorgensen, letter of January 20, 1965. 286 the ideas underlying unionism were impractical in such a station as KPFA, especially in view of the uncertain financial support and the high degree of dependence on volunteers for many programming responsibilities. The fact that Mrs. Thompson had been quite out spoken in her criticism of both Thomas and Jorgensen in relation to the SISS and FCC investigations may have made them overly-receptive to criticisms of her work. At this point in time, it is difficult to determine such factors with much precision. At any rate, by January 13, both Thomas and Jorgensen were agreed that Mrs. Thompson would be dis missed. She was given a month's severance pay and told to leave the station immediately. Other staff members immediately protested the firing, and those active in the organization of the union protested that she had been fired for union activity. The union, although it had not been recognized by Pacifica, demanded that Mrs. Thompson be reinstated, and threatened a strike. President Jorgensen reinstated her "on leave with full pay" until further determination could be made by the Board. The next few weeks were spent attempting to con struct a personnel policy by a joint committee of two staff and two Board members. Their report called for the Board of Directors to review the circumstances 2&7 leading to Mrs. Thompson's dismissal, inviting both Thomas and Mrs. Thompson to the March 21 meeting. The union,, viewing this procedure as a "trial," rejected it, stating; After carefully reading your letter to Mrs. Thompson, we have instructed her not to appear at the Board Meeting. ... If the Board persists in this attempt to discharge Mrs. Thompson, we will proceed with strike action against the Foundation.7 Nevertheless, the Board reviewed the firing concluding; . , . The Board finds Mrs. Thompson's original dis missal was justified and for good cause, and there fore directs her termination effective this date (March 21, 1964). » <> . At the same meeting, the Board instructed that the officials of Local 51, NABET, be informed that Pacifica did not recognize NABET as bargaining agent for its employees in Berkeley. However, to determine whether the employees wished NABET to represent them, Pacifica was prepared to join with NABET to ask the g State Mediation Service to supervise an election. Prior to the delivery of notification to either Mrs. Thompson about the disposition of her case, or the decision to seek an election in the union matter, some union members learned of the Board's action regarding

7'Letter from officers of Local 51, National Association of Broadcast Employees and Technicians, March 17, 1964. Board of Directors, March 21, 1964. 9Ibid. 238 Mrs. Thompson. Two ultimatums were delivered to the station management: (1) that Mrs. Thompson be rein stated and (2) that the union be recognized, and a con tract be negotiated. Since Jorgensen could not do either in view of the Board's recent action,, the union members struck the station, forcing it off the air, March 23. Of the Pacifica employees, half (14) joined the strike, and half (14) stayed on their jobs. More of the full-time employees joined the strike than remained working. Using the remaining workers and volunteers, the station was back on the air within three hours. The strike lasted seven weeks. It was settled when Pacifica agreed to recognize the union, and submit Mrs. Thompson's firing to arbitration. The arbitration was delayed by the illness of Mrs. Thompson until late fall of 1964, and the report was not filed until July 22, 1965. The arbitor concluded the firing was without just cause, but Mrs. Thompson had "substantially contributed by her conduct to the circumstances which brought about severance of employ ment." Therefore, he ruled that she be reinstated at half pay from the date of her firing. By this date, both Thomas and Jorgensen had resigned, largely because 2&9 they felt unable to continue once the union had been recognized.10 Hallock Hoffman became President of Pacifica in September, 1964. The SISS hearings, the FCC investigation and the strike, all coming within a two-year period, left scars still evident today.

B. PROGRAMMING OF KPFA Through the years, the programming of KPFA has remained fairly consistent. Innovations have been made from time to time, such as telephone call-in programs, and the programming time has been increased until today the station operates about 20 hours a day. But on the whole, the type and the intent of the programming have remained quite consistent through the twenty years the station has broadcast. Strong in the station's programming has been the public affairs programming. One of the most dominant in the Station's original purposes was to provide a forum for all viewpoints, an examination of all opinions. This has been done very consistently through the years. An examination of Appendix B, a listing of public affairs programming for a three-month period, will reveal the tremendous breadth of scope of these programs. In addi tion, of the 328 public affairs programs broadcast

Trevor Thomas, personal interview, July 1, 1969f and Russell Jorgensen, personal interview, July 22, 1963. 290 in a five-month period of 1965-66, more than two-thirds (223) were originated locally from KPFA. Table 5 gives r. breakdown of these programs by subject category.

TABLE 2

KPFA PUBLIC AFFAIRS PROGRAMS BY CATEGORY OCTOBER 20, 1965 TO FEBRUARY 20, 1966

Foreign and International ...... 47 Vietnam 10 Peace Movement. 15 United Nations 12 National Issues, General...... 11 Education 19 Local Issues 10 Legal 19 Ecology k Religion $ Science and Psychology 31 Race Relations and Poverty Programs . 22 Miscellaneous . 15 Total 223

Source: Tabulation for Board of Directors, by Elsa Knight Thompson, Public Affairs Director, KPFA, March 18, 1966.

Recent programs continue to show this wide diver sity. During the spring of 1969s the station broadcast series of programs on adoption, race relations, drug use, obscenity, organ transplants, draft protests, and innovations in education. Individual programs during February were produced on a variety of topics, including 291 economics, the Kennedy assassination, French student protest, lunar exploration, homosexuality, race rela tions, Mexican-American history, the role of university research in war, the rich and "super-rich," student protest, and the Chicago Democratic Convention protests. In addition, during the student protests of 1964 and 1965 at the University of California, KPFA broad cast in depth coverage of the conflict there. VThen the confrontation over the so-called "People's Park" took place in May, 1969, KPFA broadcast coverage of the spe cial meetings of the Berkeley City Council which con sidered issues involved in the students® protests. In the area of music, KPFA continues to broad cast live music concerts, although not to the extent that was done when the station first went on the air. The introduction of high quality portable tape record ing units have made it possible to tape many concerts at locations other than the studio for later broadcast. The total of live and taped music is about the same as the total live music of the earlier years. The commer cially recorded music aired on the station continues to be presented in a concert form with analysis and commentary. The literature and drama programs presented by the station continue to explore the new writers as well as the classic works from the past. Much programming 292 from the BBC is used, especially radio drama, since there is little of the latter now produced in the United States. Table 3 gives percentages for the various pro gram categories during the week of March 2-8, 1969.

TABLE 3

KPFA PROGRAMMING BY CATEGORIES, MARCH 2-8, 1969

Category Hours Percent

Music Classical 39.0 30.5 Jazz 10.0 7.e Rock 3.0 2.3 Other 2.75 2.2 Total Music 54.75 42.8 Public Affairs Discussion & Interviews 17.0 13.3 News 7.0 5.5 Press Reviews 5.25 4.1 Commentary 3.5 2.7 Total Public Affairs 22.75 25.6 Literature and Arts Prose Readings 2.25 1.8 Poetry Readings 3.0 2.3 Literary Reviews 3.5 2.7 Discussion and Other 5.5 4.3 Total Literature & Arts 14.25 11.1 Informal Talk and Music 20.0 15.6 Children's Programs 6 .25 4.9 Total 11^.0 100.0

These figures were compiled from the published schedule, although it is recognized that there may have been minor 293 deviations in the programming as actually broadcast. For the purpose of proportion, the scheduled programming should provide an adequate basis of comparison. In addition, Appendix C reproduces the schedule of the March 2-8 programming as listed in the KPFA Folio, All radio and television stations, in seeking initial licenses or renewals, must complete an application for the FCC listing various information about the station—its owners, its financial standing, its programming, and its technical facilities. In I960, the FCC held extensive hearings to determine what form the section concerning programming should take.11 As a result of these hearings, the Commission made exten sive revisions in the portions of the application forms pertaining to programming. In doing so, the Commission issued three separate forms for various groups: com mercial radio, commercial television, and noncommercial radio and television stations. The most drastic changes were made in the forms to be used by the commercial stations. Following the conclusion of the Commission that: [The broadcaster is] obligated to make a positive, diligent, and continuing effort in good faith, to determine the tastes, needs, and desires of the

11FCC, Report and Statement of Policy re: Commission En Banc Programming Inquiry. Public Notice O0-970 (July 29, I960). a L 29k public in his.community, and to provide programming to meet these needs and interests.12 The revised Section IV asked licensees; A. State in Exhibit No. the methods used by the applicant to ascertain the needs and inter ests of the public served by the station. Such information shall include (1) the major com munities or areas which the applicant principally undertakes to serve and (2) identification of representative groups, interests and organiza tions which were consulted. B. Describe in Exhibit No. the significant needs and interests of the public which the applicant believes his station will serve during the coming license period, including those with respect to national and international matters. C. List in Exhibit No. typical and illustrative programs or program series (excluding Enter tainment and News) that applicant plans to broad cast during the coming license period to meet those needs and interests. D. Describe in Exhibit No. the procedures appli- licant has or proposes to have for the considera tion and disposition of complaints or suggestions coming from the public.13 On the other hand, the application for new or renewal of licenses of noncommercial stations omits these questions, asking only for a recitation of pro gramming in various categories during the past year and proposed programming in the next three-year period. Since all the Pacifica stations operate noncommercially, they are not required to complete the more extensive

i 2 FCC, En Banc Programming Inquiry, p. 14. "^FCC, Form 303, Section IV-B, page 1. This form is for television stations. Radio stations use Form 303» Section IV-A, containing essentially the same language with the exception of the omission of the fourth question above. 295 commercial form. The reader might conclude that Pacifica therefore does not consult with representative groups in determining its program schedule. Actually, such consultation plays a large part in Pacifica pro gramming. First, the very existence of the subscriber group makes it possible for KPFA to identify its real audience with far more precision than virtually any other station in the country. A steady stream of programming sugges tions flows from subscribers, from a suggestion for a worthwhile interview to comments about placement or percentages of various program types. Such suggestions from subscribers have always been encouraged by Pacifica, and are carefully evaluated and discussed by the station staff. Historically, such suggestions have played a substantial part in determining the programming of the station. Second, the advisory board of the station is composed of persons of the type cited as "representative leaders" by the Commission. In addition, the prepara tion of programs of the type aired by Pacifica inevitably brings the station staff into contact with countless other persons who are representative of various com munity groups. Such persons include church leaders, educators, labor leaders, musicians, and businessmen. 296 Their suggestions and comments concerning KPFA program ming are also considered, although probably more with an eye to developing future programming than satisfying the FCC. Finally, one must not overlook the unique struc ture of Pacifica stations. Their freedom from both sponsors and sponsoring agencies permits the highly educated staff members to use their good judgment exclusively in the area of programming to community needs rather than trying to compromise between these and show ing a profit as is the case in commercial stations.

C. CRITICAL EVALUATION OF PROGRAMMING Two of the hypotheses of this study involve assumptions that the programming of the station is of high quality. Up to this point, the programming has been described, with the assumption that the reader will recognize the inherent high intellectual and artistic level. However, to concretely support these assumptions, this section will examine the views of critics and other writers of the national press as to the quality of pro gramming of station KPFA and other Pacifica stations. One of the most encouraging assessments of the station's performance was contained in the FCC's state ment on renewing the license of the station in 1969• 297 After reviewing complaints directed against Pacifica stations, the Commission concludedt There can be no doubt that the stations provide a unique and well received programming for sizable segment of the population of the areas they are licensed to serve.14 However, it is recognized that the FCC is not likely to be considered an accomplished critic of quality broad casting. Editorial writers of the nation have been quite lauditory in describing the programming of the Pacifica stations.15 ^ A few selected comments illustrate; These radio stations deserve to be judged on the basis of their performance. It has been a good performance, in the best American tradition of controversy. —Washington Post, November 30, 1963? p.12. The Pacifica stations are frankly esoteric, even a little precious, in their music; outspoken and often controversial in their discussion programs. Their standard offering—in contrast to that of popular music stations which blanket the country— is symphonies and symposiums. The stations have carried a spectrum of minority political views from the extreme left to the extreme right . . . broad casters who are willing to recognize the intelli gence of their audiences; to offer them wide free dom of choice among all kinds of ideas, outrageous or not; and to furnish the kind of unorthodox fare that is such a rarity on radio, on TV and in the press today. —New York Times, November 15» 1963, p. 34.

"^FCC, re Applications of Pacifica Foundation, February 28, 1969. 15 Since all three stations operate on much the same format, essentially that of the original KPFA, it is assumed that the comments about "Pacifica stations" apply equally to all three stations. 298 The three Pacifica stations, all listener- supported were trying to provide diverse adult fare. They were making free use of freedom of speech. They were producing serious poetry and drama; they provided a forum of ideas for Communists, Fascists, John Birch spokesmen and everything in between. They were offering diversity which presumably the FCC advocated. By emphatically upholding their right to do this, the FCC has encouraged broadcasters to avail them selves of the right to be free, to be unusual, to be controversial, to be provocative. —St. Louis Post-Dispatch, January 28, 1964? P* 2C. The national news magazines have, from time to time, commented on the unusual programming of the Pacifica stations s Probably nowhere west of the BBC's Third Program could the twist of a radio dial bring such a flood of culture and sophisticated political variety. . . . [KPFA is] the radio station that has become the highbrow's delight. —Newsweek, February 24? 195$» p. 63. The station's [WBAI] program is crowded with excellent music, also makes foom for viewpoints that would make many a network executive's brush cut bristle into flame. —Time, January 25, 1963» P« 5$. Pacifica, whose programs have earned a battery of awards for excellence and originality, goes in for exactly the sort of bold, imaginative pro gramming which the FCC encourages. —Newsweek, November 25, 1963, p. 80, The foundation's penchant for controversy is abetted by a flock of waggish personalities who are refreshingly aloof from the slick chafeter of com mercial radio. . . . The emphasis on quality has paid off. KPFK has won awards for its documentaries on Martin Luther King and the 1965 Watts riot. On all three stations, nearly half the program day is reserved for news and public affairs; music selec tions range from Bach cantatas in the morning to acid rock after midnight. —Time, April 25, 1969, p. 90. 299

In 1963* discussing the licensing situation,

Laurent B. Frantz wrote in tne Nation;

. o . there can be no doubt that the three Pacifica stations are far better qualified than most of the stations that receive their licenses and renewals without question or hesitation. The intelligence and quality of their programming have won national and international admiration and a whole string of awards, prizes, and commendations, including George Foster Peabody awards . . If we can afford radio channels on which popular records are played hour after hour, then the mere fact that broadcast channels are limited is scarcely reason for raising the "broadcasting is a privilege" cry against Pacifica. The dreary wasteland of trash and trivia that pervades much of commercial broadcasting, both in radio and television, can scarcely have escaped the FCC's attention. If the present Commission is concerned about this situation, as was its former chairman, Newton N. Minnow, one might think it would be concerned with preserving one of the few creative voices in radio . . .1"

Saturday Review columnist Robert Lewis Shayon has com mented about the Pacifica stations;

Through ten years . . . KPFA endured its survival ordeal. Its mystique ("a threat to the establishment since it encourages the participant to question, to think, to feel intensely") was often regarded by its distant friends and admirers as an efflorescence special to the hills surrounding the University of California campus at Berkeley. . . . But now Los Angeles looks forward [to a Pacifica station.] . . . two drums now beat in the West. If more drums are added eastward across the Rockies, the dialogue of the overfed cannot help but be overheard nationally by the undernourished. We may come a little closer to the answer of the riddle of what the public wants; manna or meat and potatoes. —May 30, 1959» P« 26.

1 "Pacifica and the FCC: Dangerous Precedent," The Nation, November 30, 1963, p. 360. 300 Some FM commercial stations, and stations operated by educational institutions and municipalities, do feature such programs. Rather rarely they are heard even on commercial AM stations and on networks. The virtues of a listener-subscription station however, are that it has no commercials at all5 it is free from the subtle pressures which tend to level out the schedules of educational and community stations! and it schedules programs listeners may want to hear in the prime evening hours when they are most often at home. . . . It has taken Pacifica a decade to plant and nur ture the tender thought that people who have nothing to sell, no influences to peddle, and no mission of enlightenment to perform can pay jointly for broad casting which is exclusively non-consensus. Therein lies the Pacifica idea's great social usefulness. —December 26, 1959» p« 26. Potential Pacifica subscribers might realize that what is being born here is a priceless awakening and identification of creative activity and intellec tual curiosity—a face-to-face sharing, off the air as well as on, of cultural stimulus and enjoyment. Pacifica Radio as a fringe benefit of American society is a myth; it is time to see it as a grass roots Prometheus bringing warmth and light to the desiccated art of radio broadcasting. —August 20, I960, p. 34. Discussing a Pacifica interview of Stokeley Carmichael in contrast to the glimpses afforded by the national TV networks, Shayon stated: Ideally there should be time on TV for the fuller image. But there isn't. That the networks would present a reasoned, leisurely discourse with so controversial a public figure is improbable. All the more reason to salute the Pacifica stations for their dogged service to truth. July 9, 1966, p. 42. Jack Gould, radio-television critic for the New York Times has written; For want of a better phrase, Pacifica can be likened in many respects to an American variation on the British Broadcasting Corporation's "Third Programme." Since it first began its operations on 301 the West Coast in 1949, it has genuinely succeeded in adding a new dimension and a fresh voice- different and dissenting—to the national scene. —July 10, i960, Sec. 2, p. 15. In 1962, a program about homosexuals produced by KPFA was subsequently aired by WBAI. Of this Gould saids Last night's discussion of homosexuality was handled with candor and tact on.radio station WBAI. . . . The ninety-minute program' was by far the most extensive consideration of the subject to be heard on American radio, and it succeeded, one would think, in encouraging a wider understanding of the homosexual's attitudes and problems. . . But from the standpoint of broadcasting, the chief significance of the evening lay in the illus tration of the value of the independent station's catering to a specialized following. Such a station, knowing the composition of its audience, can offer subject matter that, if addressed to coast-to-coast masses of all ages, might pose difficulties for a network. . . . the contemporary public seems ready to accept almost any subject matter so long as it is presented thoughtfully. —July 16, 1962, p. 47. Concerning the delay in renewing the Pacifica licenses in 1963, Gould wrote: To be sure, there are times when Pacifica can be trying on the air. For all of WBAI's fine music, ambitious drama projects and extensive discussions, there are moments when it is so esoteric, so smugly Precious, that it almost seems determined to thwart the potential of listener-supported radio. But such reservations are entirely incidental to Pacifica's larger contribution, a contribution that warrants encouragement. The broadcasting spectrum needs one channel set aside for non-conformity, for avant-garde poetry that may shock or bore, for a critique of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, for an examination of homosexualism, for inclusion of political commentary that assumes a listener is sufficiently mature to detect its slant. One reason WBAI went on the air was to be an irri tant to the status quo. Renewal of Pacifica's li cense holds far less peril to the national security than denial of its franchise. —August 4, 1963, Sec. 2, p. 13. 302 In 1958 [, KPFA was awarded the George Foster Peabody Award for Public Service for "courageous venture into the lightly-trafficked field of thoughtful broadcasting, and for its demonstration that mature entertainment plus ideas constitute public service broadcasting at its best."1'' Among other awards received by the Pacifica sta tions are a du Pont award for programming excellences, several California State Fair Awards, and Ohio State awards. In i960, KPFK received a Peabody award for "local public service programming." It is clear that the critics and national writers regard the Pacifica stations as a departure from normal radio programming. They have applauded the station's challenging, intellectual, and provocative programming.

D. FINANCIAL SUPPORT The Pacifica stations have never been self- supporting in the sense that Lewis Hill envisioned. The income from subscriptions normally equals from fifty to seventy per cent of the expenses, the remainder being made up by a variety of methods. One might wonder, with current subscriptions totalling over 3,000 why the sta tion still has an operating deficit. The answer lies

"'"'''citation, George Foster Peabody Award, to KPFA, April. 303 in the desire of the station to do the best it can coupled with the perennial optimism of those who oper ate the station. Had Pacifica chosen to remain constant at any one of a number of levels from past years, today it could be completely self-supporting from subscriber income. But it has not chosen to do this. As a result, the staff, which numbered about six in 1949f now totals nearly twenty, and in addition, the station has the obligation to partially support several positions in the Pacifica Foundation. Table 4 shows a comparison of the number of subscribers, the number of staff positions, annual operating costs, and the annual deficit or surplus. Prom the data in Table 4? it is easy to see that as the number of subscribers increases, so does the demand for additional staff. In addition, pay increases have tended to force operating costs upward, so that in spite of having held the number of staff fairly con stant since 1961, the budget of the station has con tinued to rise. It is obvious that the station cannot continue to run a deficit each year. However, KPFA is in better financial position than KPFK, whose total indebtedness currently is more than $150,000. Never theless, the station is in debt, with several lar&e bank loans outstanding, and little immediate prospect of retiring these loans. 304

TABLE 4

FINANCIAL DATA FOR KPFA BY YEARS

Full-Time Annual Surplus Staff Operating or Year Subscribersa Equivalent Costs Deficit

1949 225 , 6 36,000 1951 1,200 6 4$,200 1952 1,725 3 61,992 1953 2,774 9.5 66,000 1954 3,332 10 73,133 1955 3,900 12 75,000 ( 6,600) 1956 4,300 na 97,500 ( 7,200) 1957 5,300 12.5 93,900 ( 1,100 195$ 6,373 na 107,700 395 1959 7,469 na 103,000 -0- I960 7,322 17.5 na (15,724) 1961 7,674 17.5 na na 1962 7,905 na 165,700 10,000 1963 7,533 13.5 193,000 (23,000) 1964 7,962 13.5 132,974 ( 205) 1965 7,249 19.5 133,330 (20,300) 1966 7,430 20 211,700 ( 6,000) 1967 7,430 20 233,400 (24,300) 1963 3,199 13.25 230,000 (15,000)

^Current as of December of each year. Some employees work part-time, na—not available.

Aside from the income from subscribers, the sta tion receives income from donations and from the annual marathon. Donations are gifts to the station apart from subscriptions and from the beginning have played a significant role in financing the station. 305 The Marathon was begun at WBAI in 1965» largely the creation of Chris Albertson, a staff member there. In a financial crisis, the station decided to suspend all regular programming, to play records*and talk about their need for money to stay on the air. The idea was successful, and imitated by the other two Pacifica stations. The talk and music is supplemented by local radio or television personalities and other local celebrities who drop by to participate, as well as large numbers of volunteers who aid in the undertaking. Services and goods are bartered away in exchange for contributions, similar to the "auctions" held by KQED and other educational television stations. The primary idea is to achieve a goal of a pre-set amount of money, at which time the normal programming will be resumed. KPFA has had a high degree of success with the Marathon. Pledges reached the goal figure each year— $50,000 the first year, and $100,000 each year there after, although a check on actual cash received showed that in 1963, only $70,962 was received by the station from the pledged amount. Undoubtedly the largest single factor in the abi-L ity of the station to produce the range of progamming it does in such a relatively small budget is the fact that volunteers assist the operation of the station in nearly all phases. This has been true from the beginning, when 306 Hill found that curious listeners often stayed to help. Secretarial, program production, carpenter, announcer, and engineer assistance are given by volunteers. None of the commentators is paid for his services. If the station were forced to operate on a strictly paid basis, it could not approach in any way the diversity and qual ity of programming it has aired. The Foundation remains committed to operation based on listener subscriptions. The Board of Directors stated in 1965s The long-run aim is to obtain enough subscriptions so that we need not seek large donations. Pacifica has an ideological bias in favor of listener- sponsored stations. Furthermore, financing through subscriptions obtained from many people interested in the programs is a protection against the possi bility of changed program emphasis which could occur if the Board is selected on the basis of ability to raise funds.1°

Summary. The operation of KPFA in the decade of the 1960's was marked by external pressures from govern mental investigations, and internal pressures, largely organizational and unionism. The past five years have been relatively stable, but find the station operating with a deficit each year. The programming of the station has been shown to be devoted to controversial issues in public affairs and

1 & Board of Directors, November 21, 1965. 307 significant music and literature. Reviews of the critics and editorial statements have lauded the programming of the station. CHAPTER IX

THE SUBSCRIBERS OF KPFA

KPFA is unusual among American radio stations in many ways. One of the most intriguing of these, from the point of view of the researcher, is that KPFA can identify a sizeable segment of its audience very pre cisely—the listener«subscribers. Undoubtedly, there are many listeners to KPFA whose names do not appear on the subscriber lists. This fact is recognized by KPFA as the rationale for their announcements over the station urging listeners to become subscribers to support the kind of program ming carried by KPFA. So in this regard, any assumption that the subscribers compose the entire listening group for KPFA is certainly a faulty one. Nevertheless, the existence of an accurate listing of more than ten thousand persons who are subscribers or who have recently been subscribers enables the researcher to study the audience of KPFA much more precisely than that of any other radio or television station, except those educational television stations that also use the subscriber plan. This enables the analysis of one portion 30S 300 of the KPFA audience with a degree of certainty some what lacking in most audience analyses. It also gives insight into the kind of person who is willing to support a broadcast service of the unusual character found in KPFA.

Previous Studies of KPFA Subscribers The KPFA subscriber group has been the subject of several research projects in the past, some by station personnel and others by outside researchers. Lewis Hill initiated several studies of the audience in the early days of the station. In the fall of 1950, when the signal was limited to the Berkeley area, a survey of 657 persons in Berkeley was conducted by telephone. The sample was randomly selected from the community. The projected results, as shown on Table 5» projected that 2.7 per cent of the FM set owners in Berkeley were sub scribers to KPFA. In October of 1955» Hill conducted a similar survey over the six-county Bay Area, within the 1 mv/m signal contour of the enlarged KPFA signal. These re sults, also shown in Table 10, make an interesting com parison to those of five years earlier. The per cent of

"1 KPFA; a Survey of Its Past andlFuture, (Berkeleys Pacifica Foundation, January, 1951)> p. 45« (Mimeographed) o Lewis Hill, Voluntary Listener-Sponsorship (Berkeley: Pacifica Foundation, 1958), pp. 6b-72. 310 homes having FM sets was almost identical! Even assuming that Berkeley in 1950 should have had a higher than normal rate of FM ownership, one would speculate that the.Bay Area percentage would have, in five years, sur passed it. But these were years of decline for the FM medium, as shown by the fact that by 1955, KPFA was the only station remaining in the Bay Area broadcasting independent programming, that is, not merely duplicating the signal of an AM station.

TABLE 5 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS OF TWO KPFA SURVEYS, 1950 & 1955

Berkeley Bay Area Projected Estimates 1950 1955 Number of homes in area 35,941 356,000 Number of homes having FM sets 6,577 153,000 Homes having FM as a per cent of total homes Id.3 1° 18.5# Number of homes using FM sets 3,913 67,600 Homes using FM as a per cent of total homes 10.% 7.91o Total subscribers to KPFA 17^ 3,350 Subscribers as a per cent of homes having FM 2.7$> 2.1io

Summarized from "KPFAj a Survey of It's Past and Future" (Berkeley, Pacifica Foundation, January, 1951)» p. 45 (mimeographed) and Lewis Hill, Voluntary Listener- Sponsorship (Berkeley: Pacifica Foundation, 1958), pp.66-72. 311 Another survey of subscribers was conducted during March, I960, by Steve Polgar, a student in psychology at the University of California. 3 His question naire was mailed to every subscriber, then numbering about 7»500. Approximately 3*000 completed question naires were returned, and of these, 1,350 were randomly selected for tabulating. To check on possible differ ences between cooperating and non-cooperating persons in the sample, fifty questionnaires were completed by tele phone among a random sample of those subscribers who had not returned a questionnaire. The results of this latter group followed those of the larger sample very closely, and it was concluded that there was little or no dif ference between the co-operating members and the non- cooperating group. Polgar found that the subscribers identified them selves overwhelmingly as Democrats (51.2$) rather than Republican (14.2$) or "independent" (30.9$). He found the education level quite high. 98.5% had completed high school, 45.2$ had completed at least three years of college, and 21.0$ had "the last year completed at the Doctorate level." Income was fairly well distributed, with slightly more than half having incomes between $6,000 and $15,000, and 11.8$ in the "over $15,000"

^Steve Polgar, unpublished survey of KPFA sub scribers, March, I960, (in KPFA files). 312 category. At that time, this placed the median sub scriber income above the median for the total population. By far, the two most popular magazines subscribed to were The Reporter (27 per cent) and Time (25.2 per cent). The subscribers generally indicated approval of KPFA programming. More than half (57.0 per cent) felt programs were "well balanced;" 7.2 per cent felt program ming was too liberal, 3-3 per cent said it was too con servative, 4»0 per cent said it favored both extremes too often, and 23 per cent had no opinion on program balance. Another survey, conducted by KPFA in 1965» con cerned demographic information about the subscribers.^ This survey drew more than a 50 per cent response from the group that had been randomly selected from subscriber lists. There were 394 returns from an original sample of 723 drawn from the subscriber list. These results tended to confirm Polgar's findings of five years eaxtlier. Political preference was Democratic (65.7 per cent), with a large "independent" identification (14«5 per cent) and a small Republican group (5.3 per cent). The educational level was found even higher than Polgar's sample, as shown on Table 6. For this question the sample totaled 566,

^"KPFA Subscriber Population Survey, 1965/' Berkeley, Pacifica Foundation, 1965. (Mimeographed) 313 since the questionnaire asked for information about both husband and wife and more than two-thirds of the completed questionnaires came from married couples.

TABLE 6 EDUCATION LEVELS OF KPFA SUBSCRIBERS, 1965

Level Number Per Cent

No college degree 123 21.7 Bachelor's degree 217 38.4 Master's degree 140 24.7 Ph.D. or other degree beyond M.A. 86 15.2

Source; KPFA Subscriber Population Survey, 1965.

Television sets were owned by only 59.5 per cent of the sample, although estimates of the San Francisco- Oakland market as a whole showed 91 per cent of homes had television.^ More than three-quarters (79.9 per cent) of those owning television sets reported watching less than one hour a day. In a study of the audience for the "serious music" radio station, Winston, in 1955? used KPFA subscribers in Palo Alto as a comparison group. £ The study

^Television Magazine0 Vol. XXII, No. 7 (July 1965), p. 87. fc\Donald Charles Winston, "Some Personality Attri butes of the Serious Music Audience," (unpublished Master's thesis, Stanford University, 1955). 314 concerned San Francisco radio station KEAR, which during a labor dispute that resulted in loss of many advertis ing accounts, broadcast appeals to listeners for contri butions to underwrite its operations. Winston compared four groupss those KEAR listeners contributing money, those known to be KEAR listeners but not contributing, KPFA listener-subscribers in Palo Alto, and a control group randomly drawn from the Palo Alto area. The study, conducted by personal interview, used several scales designed to measure a number of attitudes and characteristics of the individual, such as "liberal- conservative," "political efficacy," "political activity "sophistication," "knowledge of music," and "mass media habits." Each scale consisted of a number of questions, to which the respondent indicated a "strong agree", "agree," "no opinion," "disagree," or "strongly disagree response. Winston found the KPFA subscribers were more liberal than any of the other groups, but not statistic ally different from the other groups in "political effi cacy" or "political activity." The KPFA group included far more registered Democrats, as well as more who ad mitted writing to elected representatives and contri buting to campaigns. They showed a marked preference for magazines Winston characterized as "literary" and "liberal" as opposed to those described as "news" and 315 and "general." Twice as many in the control group owned television sets as did the KPFA group or either of the KEAR groups. The KPFA subscribers were found to be the most highly educated of the four groups. Winston concluded, on the basis of his study, that specialized radio audiences are a reality in radios That an audience consisting of but a small part of the population could possess qualities generally higher than those of the population at large was shown by this studys that such an audience could be mobilized financially behind a radio station was demonstrated beyond a doubt by the action of the KEAR contributors, as well as by the subscriptions of the KPFA people.7 It can be concluded from these studies that the KPFA audience is more liberal in political belief than the average person, possesses a higher degree of educa tion, and uses the mass media deliberately for a pur pose other than entertainment. It has been indicated that this group tends to reject television as a useful medium. It also has been suggested that the KPFA sub scriber is more active politically than the normal person. It was the purpose of the present study to test these findings.

Method of the Present Study For this study, it was decided to conduct a sur vey comparing KPFA subscribers to a random sample of

7Ibid., p. 77. 316 Bay Area persons drawn from the same communities. For this purpose, 210 names were selected from a computer print-out of KPFA subscribers, by drawing every forty- fourth name. If this name had an address outside the immediate Bay Area, it was discarded and the name imme- g diately below it was selected. This was done so that a representative control group could be assured, in that the control group was balanced by community to correspond to the subscriber sample. The control group was drawn from three area tele- g phone directories by computing the number of names necessary from each city to correspond to the proportion in the subscriber sample, and adding twenty-five per cent. This resulting number varied, according to the different communities represented by the KPFA sample, as selected. The requisite number for the control group was increased by twenty-five per cent under the assumption that the control group was less likely to respond to the question naire than the KPFA group. Since it was desired to have g The sample, as selected, was thus limited to the total KPFA subscriber group that resides in the communi ties used in the survey. This includes about #5 P®r cent of the total subscriber lists, according to KPFA break down of subscribers. o The three directories used were San Francisco, Oakland (including Berkeley), and Palo Alto. 317 nearly the same number of completed questionnaires from each group, it was decided to include a larger original sample from the control group. The number of needed names for the control group from each community determined, this number then was divided into the total number of telephone directory pages for that group of communities. This gave the in terval number of pages from which names were selected. Then the first listing of a home telephone in the de sired community in the second column on the right-hand page was selected for the sample.^ Following this process, the final sample consisted of two hundred ten names from the KPFA subscriber list, and two hundred fifty-four names selected at random from Bay Area communities. Both samples were identical in the proportion of names from the various Bay Area com munities. To each of these was mailed a questionnaire with a covering letter explaining the survey as measuring political attitudes and mass media habits. 11 There was no apparent connection to the Pacifica Foundation or KPFA

10 Since there are about fifteen communities re presented by the three directories, it should be apparent that some directories represented more than one community However, the listings are mixed, rather than separated by community as is the case in some Eastern directories. 11 A copy of the questionnaire and covering letter will be found in Appendix A. 316 nor was it revealed that the KPFA subscriber list had been utilized in drawing the sample. This was done to eliminate potential bias in favor of KPFA on the part of subscribers, although undoubtedly, it reduced the rate of return from this group.

The Questionnaire The questionnaire was designed with four purposes. First, it was desired to compare the response of a random sample of the total KPFA audience to that found by Winston in Palo Alto on both the liberal-conservative scale and the political-efficacy scale. For this reason, both scales were similar, although modified forms of the ones used in that study.12 Second, these responses were tested against reported voting records and evaluations of current public officials by the respondent. A third purpose was to determine if there were significant differences between the KPFA group and the control group in the above measurements. A final pur pose was to determine differences between the KPFA group and the control group in evaluation of radio and tele vision broadcast services.

"^Winston, pp. 7-12, 14-18. 319 Liberal-conservative scale. This scale is essen- 13 tially one developed by Winston to measure relative

position on an arbitrary scale. No attempt is made to

determine who is "liberal" or "conservative" per se. The

scale is used only to determine which group tends to be

more liberal or conservative in relation to the other. 1 Ll This technique was earlier used by Centers in develop

ing a similar scale.

In using such a scale to test for liberal- 15 conservative tendencies, the findings of Adorno were relied upon. He found that liberalism and con servatism, although complex and multidimensional in nature, are characterized by certain underlying ideo logical "trends." Conservative trends are described as support of the status quo, resistance to social change, and support of values such as ambition, competition, and free enterprise. This frequently results in a hos tility to organized labor and government activity in social fields.

It should be noted that Adorno®s feelings, espe cially in the area of prejudice were quite controversial,

13Ibid. "^Richard Centers, The Psychology of Social Classes, (Princeton: Princeton Press, 1949), Chapter 4. "^T. W. Adorno and others, The Authoritarian Personality (New York; Harper & Brothers, 1950) Chapter 5. 320 and subject to much critical evaluation following their publication in 1950. However, in a review of the research on "authoritarianism" in 1967, Kirscht and Dillehay observes To be sure, the work does not withstand critical appraisal by standards of advanced personality re search methods and theory. The volume did, however, widely influence thinking and research in the social sciences. Its central theses is that prejudiced and hostile attitudes are expressions of inner needs or impulses which form the foundation of the authori tarian personality syndrome.1° Further investigation into the relationship of conservatism to the broader area of authoritarianism was done by McClosky,17 by constructing a scale dealing with conservative ideology, but not specifically political in nature. Performance on this scale was compared to simultaneous performance on personality characteristic scales. McClosky found conservatism negatively related to education, self-confidence and social responsibility, but positively related to measures of dominance, aliena tion, pessimism, and guilt.

1 John P. Kirscht and Ronald C. Dillehay, Dimensions of Authoritarianism (Lexingtons University of Kentucky Press, 1967)» p. 4-5. "^Herbert McClosky, "Conservatism and Personality " American Political Science Review, Vol. 52, (March 195$), pp. 479-93. 321 McClosky's scale was used in further studies by a group headed by Campbell with similar findings. Conservatism was found to be negatively related to education and social status, but positively related to age. Campbell also observed an "acquiescence" effect among those of lesser education—that is, they tended to agree with the item statement more than they dis agreed. When a reversed scale was used, the more highly educated emerged as the more "authoritarian."19 To further test these relationships, a mixed scale was constructed—with some statements positively con structed and others negatively. On this scale, the more poorly educated once again emerge as more authori tarian. Campbell theorizes that the more highly educated respond more to the content of the questions. 20 In spite of these questions raised by Campbell, Kirscht and Dillehay concluded that there was basic merit in the procedure. Reviewing a number of studies based on theories and methods set out by Adorno, they concluded: There are institutional areas in which the authoritarian person may more easily channel his interests. Politics is one such potential arena,

1 $ Angus Campbell and others, The American Voter (New York: Wiley, I960), especially pp. 510-15. 19Ibid., p. 512. 2QIbid.. p. 515. 322 where extremist groups have a cultural legitimacy. An authoritarian interested in politics is more likely to prefer conservative ideology.21 In view of these research findings, for the pre sent study, a ten item scale was constructed as a test for liberal-conservative attitude. Five of the items were phrased so that an "agree" answer would indicate a conservative attitude, while the other five were phrased so that agreement indicated the opposite posi tion. In this manner the scale would minimize the "acquiescence" effect noted by Campbell. The tentative scale and a scale framed positively were administered to a small test group. Several diffi culties in wording of questions were found, and these corrected. The statement concerning profits was re written several times, but still remained confusing, largely due to reversing. The clearest statement was found to be the original one, and this was used, making six "liberal" statements and four reversed to "conserva tive" statements. In view of this, it should be ex pected that a slightly liberal bias would appear in the results, although it was not expected to be more pro nounced in one group as compared to the other. The final scale contained seven questions used by Winston, with three of these reversed. The seven weres

21 Kirscht & Dillehay, 0£. cit.. p. 133. 323 12. Labor unions are a good thing for the country. 13. Most businesses in this country make a profit that is fair. 15. The government should not be in the electric power business. 17. The government should see to it that every one has a chance to work. 19. The government should not get involved in providing medical care to people. 21. The government should see to it that every intelligent young person has a chance to get a college education. 23. Rich people should not have to pay income taxes at higher rates than other people. In addition three questions were added: 2A-. The government should see to it that regard less of a person's race or creed, he has a right to a decent place to live. 26. The government should protect every person's right to express his beliefs, regardless of how unpopular they are. 27. Private enterprise is almost always more efficient than the government. Although Adorno and many later studies had used similar scales, the responses were limited to "agree" or "disagree." However, Winston had used five responses "strongly agree," "agree," "undecided," "disagree," and "strongly disagree." This gives a wider range of choice and provides for a choice indicating no opinion or lack of either agreement or disagreement. It was decided to follow this latter pattern of responses. 324 The scale was scored by assigning all ten ques tions equal weight, following procedures developed by Likers. 22 In view of the fact that the scale was not used to determine conservatives or liberals in any absolute sense, but only to compare the relative posi tions of the two groups on the scale, it was concluded that this procedure would be acceptable. Each of the liberal-positive questions was assigned a value of "5" for "strongly agree" decreasing to "1" for "strongly disagree." The conservative-positive statements were scored using opposite values, that is, "5" for "strongly disagree" etc. Thus the higher the final total score on the scale the more liberal the attitudes measured by it. The lower the score, the more conservative the attitudes.

Political Efficacy. Six items were included to measure Political Efficacy, defined by Campbell; The measure of political efficacy is designed to capture differences between individuals in a basic sense of control over the workings of the political system. The political efficacious individual feels that his vote counts in the operation of government and feels furthermore that there are other reason able ways in which he can influence the progress of the system beyond going to the polls.23

22See L. W. Ferguson, Personality Measurement (New York, McGraw-Hill, 1952), pp. 123-25.

^Campbell, 0£. cit., p. 516. 325 Winston used only two items in an attempt to measure. This was held to be insufficients and four more items were constructed to make a total of six items in the final scale. The items weres 13. There isn't much the average citizen can do to influence the government.

16. It really is not very important whether or not a person votes in an election. 18. If a person wants good government, he should make contributions to the campaigns of those candidates he respects. 20. The average person has a good opportunity to influence the outcome of an election by working to elect his candidate. 22. Writing to your legislator doesn't often influence the way he votes. 25. A person should discuss his feelings about political matters with his friends and associates. It will be noted that three of the questions are framed positively and the other three reversed. The same scor ing procedures were employed on this scale as on the liberal-conservative scale. A high score indicated a person who believed he could influence the course of governmental action, while a low score indicated a person who did not feel that his participation made much difference. In the final questionnaire, items from the poli tical efficacy scale were intermingled with items from the liberal-conservative scale. 326

Performance Questions. The first several ques tions were designed as a comparison to the attitude

scales. Four questions were used, each calling for a

specific evaluation or report of past action. The first asked about voting performances

1. Did you vote in the last presidential election? yes no If so, for which candidate did you vote? Cleaver Humphrey Nixon Wallace

It was hypothesized that there should be a positive

correlation between a high score on the political effi

cacy test and those persons reporting voting. It was also hypothesized that there would be a high correlation between high scores on the liberal-conservative scale

(indicating liberal attitudes) and reports of voting for

Cleaver, the Peace and Freedom Party candidate or

Humphreys, the Democratic candidate. Likewise, it was

expected that a high correlation would be found between low scores on the liberal-conservative scale and reports of voting for Nixon, the Republican candidate, or Wallace the American Independent Party candidate. However, it was recognized that there were some persons in the Bay

Area who were supporters of Senator Eugene McCarthy, regarded as more liberal than Humphrey. Many of these persons did not vote for president. However, it was decided that to provide for this response in the ques tionnaire would cause it to become unwieldy. 327 The next two questions measured the respondent's evaluation of the performance of President Nixon and Governor Reagan of Californias 2. What is your opinion of how well Richard Nixon is doing as President? Excellent Above Average Average Below Average Poor 3. What is your opinion of how well Ronald Reagan is doing as Governor? Excellent Above Average Average Below Average Poor It was hypothesized that there would be a high correlation between conservative indications from the liberal- conservative scale (low scores) and approval of the policies of Nixon and Reagan, both Republicans, and the opposite for those scoring high on the scale.

Evaluation of Mass Media. The primary purpose of this section was to determine whether the KPFA group would indicate KPFA when asked to name an outstanding radio station. However, to conceal this purpose, the section also included questions about newspapers and n i television stations. The first question followed Ropers 4. Where do you usually get most of your news about what is going on in the world? Newspapers Radio Television Magazines Talking to People The next three questions asked about news reporting:

Burns W. Roper, Emerging Profiles of Television and Other Mass Media: Public Attitudes 1959-1968 (New York: Television Information Office, 19b9), p. 2. The original studies were done by Elmo Roper, father of the author. 328 5. If you think a BETTER job of reporting news is done by any particular newspaper, name that newspaper; 6. If you think a BETTER job of reporting news is done by any particular television sta tion, name that television stations 7. If you think a BETTER job of reporting news is done by any particular radio station, name that radio station; Having asked about radio and television news coverage, the next two questions asked about public affairs pro gramming ; 8. If you think a BETTER job of public affairs programming (discussions and analysis of current problems) is done by any particular television station, name that television station ; 9. If you think a BETTER job of public affairs programming is done by any radio station, name that radio station; It was hypothesized that the KPFA subscribers would select KPFA more frequently than the control group when asked to name a station doing a better job of public affairs programming. Finally, the questionnaire asked about the total programming of both radio and television stations; 10o If there is a television station whose TOTAL programming is outstanding, in your opinion, name that television station; 11. If there is a radio station whose TOTAL programming is outstanding, in your opinion, name that radio station; It was hypothesized that the KPFA group would select KPFA much more frequently than the control group when 329 asked about the total programming of a radio station being outstanding. Demographic Information. The final items asked about the respondent's age, education and income. This was used in comparing the KPFA group to the control group in these categories. Following the findings of pre vious studies, it was hypothesized that the KPFA group would be younger, more highly educated, and have higher incomes than the control group.

Results of the Study. Questionnaires were mailed the last week of May, 1969. Of the 210 sent to the KPFA subscriber group, 107 responses were received, a return of 51 per cent. Of the 254 sent to the control group, 76 questionnaires were returned, of which two were unusable. The 74 usable returns represented 30 per cent of the sample drawn. Liberal-Conservative. Significant differences were found in responses to the Liberal-Conservative scale in the questionnaire, all indicating the KPFA subscriber group to be the more liberal group. The mean score for the KPFA group was 41.79; for the con trol group, 35-77> a difference significant at the one per cent level of confidence. When separated by age groups, the older half of the KPFA group had the most liberal mean score, but the difference between the 330 two means of the two age groups of the KPFA group was not significant. When the younger half of the KPFA group was compared with the younger half of the control group, the difference was found significant! likewise the older half of the KPFA group showed a significant difference from the older half of the control group.

TABLE 7

MEAN SCORES, LIBERAL-CONSERVATIVE SCALE

KPFA Control Age Grouping Subscribers Group

Younger half 41.42 37.14

Older half 42.23 34.25 Both groups 41.79 35.77

These results show the KPFA listener to be more liberal than that reported by Winston testing a small group in the Palo Alto area in 1955. Seven of the ten questions employed in the present study were quite similar to seven of the eight questions used by Winston, although three of these were reversed, following find ings of Campbell. While the present study finds the average listener at an average position beyond "agree" on the five-choice scale (Mean score of 41.79/10=4.1$)>

Winston reports the average of his group to be slightly 331 to the conservative side of the "agree" position (mean score of 29.14/8=3.64).25 This difference can be attributed to several factors. First, Winston's sample of twenty-two was much smaller than that of the present study, 107, which may have produced greater sampling error. Second, his sample was confined to the city of Palo Alto, a rather affluent suburban city, home of Stanford University. This would be expected to yield a more conservative find ing, than a sample selected from the metropolitan area at large. Third, since Winston used the interview technique, while the present study was based on a mail return, it could be theorized that the more liberal would be more likely to co-operate with a research pro ject identified with a State College. Thus, it is the writer's opinion that the apparent differences are not serious ones, and that in general there is probably a close correlation between the findings of the two studies. These findings are supported by both the reported voting record and the ratings of performance of President

2K Winston's scale ran from 10 to 40, with 40 representing the most conservative position. Therefore, to make his reported mean of 20.86 comparable to the present study, it was necessary to determine the differ ence between his mean and the score representing the "undecided" position (25), then add the difference to the latter number (25 + 4.14 = 29.14). Thus, to achieve a comparison to the present study, it is necessary to use 29.14 as his mean score. 332 Nixon and Governor Reagan. In Table 8 it can be seen that Humphrey had overwhelming support of the KPFA sub scriber group, but got only about 38 per cent of the votes of the control group.

TABLE 8 REPORTED VOTING RECORD

Question 1: "Did you vote in the last presidential election? If so, for which candidate did you vote''" KPFA Subscribers Control Group Candidate Number Percent Number Percent

Cleaver 7 6.5 4 5.4 Humphrey 68 63.6 28 37.9 Nixon 1 1.0 25 33.^ Wallace McCarthy (write-in) 7 6.5 Gregory (write-in) 4 3.8 1 1.0 Did not vote 20 18.6 16 21.6

Total 107 100.0 74 100.0

Two names other than the choices on the questionnaire were written ins those of Senator Eugene McCarthy and Comedian Dick Gregory, neither of whose names appeared on the California ballot. The ratings of President Nixon and Governor Reagan, shown in Table 9, further support the conclusion that the KPFA group is more liberally oriented. Only 3*7 per cent rated President Nixon's performance "Above Average," and none related him "Excellent." Members of the con trol group, on the other hand, gave a total of 36.5 per 333 cent ratings in the "Above Average" or "Excellent" categories.

TABLE 9 COMPARISON OF RANKINGS OF THE PERFORMANCE OF PRESIDENT NIXON AND GOVERNOR REAGAN Question 2; "What is your opinion of how well Richard Nixon is doing as President?" Question 3" "What is your opinion of how well Ronald Reagan is doing as Governor?"

KPFA Subscribers Control Group Ranking Number Percent Number Percent

President Nixons Excellent 7 9.5 Above Average 4 3.7 20 27.0 Average 34 31.8 28 37.8 Below Average 32 29.9 10 13.5 Poor 33 30.9 9 12.2 No Answer 4 3.7 Total 107 100.0 74 100.0

Governor Reagan Excellent 11 14.9 Above Average 9 12.2 Average 6 5.6 14 18.9 Below Average 11 10.3 12 16.2 Poor 89 83.1 28 37.8 No Answer 1 1.0 Total 107 100.0 74 100.0

More than twice as many KPFA subscribers gave Nixon a "Poor" or "Below Average" rating as did the control group. 334 This tendency is even more pronounced in the rankings of Governor Reagan, whose conservative philo sophies apparently have severely alienated the KPFA group. None ranked him either "Excellent" or "Above Average/' in contrast to the 27.1 per cent of the con trol group giving him such a rating. However, more than three-quarters of the KPFA group rated the Governor "Poor" as opposed to only 37.& per cent of the control group.

Liberal-Conservative Compared to Reported Voting. It had been hypothesized that those voting for Humphrey or Cleaver would have higher scores (indicating more liberal attitudes) on the Liberal-Conservative Scale than those voting for Nixon or Wallace. If this were found to be true, it would give further support to the assumption that the Scale was a valid measure of political belief. It was not possible to make a valid comparison of this kind in the KPFA group, since none voted for Wallace and only one for Nixon. However, even though none of the control group voted for Wallace, a significant num ber did vote for Nixon, and a comparison between these and those voting for Humphrey, Cleaver, or Gregory was made. It was found that the mean score for the Nixon voters was 30.4 while for the other group, the mean was 3$.9. The difference in mean scores was significant beyond the 1 per cent level of confidence. 335 This finding greatly supported the assumption of validity of the Liberal-Conservative Scale.

Liberal-»Conservative Compared to Rating of Nixon. As a further check of the validity of the Liberal- Conservative scale, the mean score of those rating Presi dent Nixon's performance either "Excellent" or "Above Average" was compared to the mean score of those rating him "Average" and also to those rating him "Below Average" or "Poor." The results, shown in Table 10 show strong support for the validity of the Liberal-Conservative scale.

TABLE 10 MEAN SCORES ON LIBERAL-CONSERVATIVE SCALE BY RATINGS GIVEN TO PRESIDENT NIXON

KPFA Subscribers Control Group Rating of Nixon Mean Score N Mean Score N

Excellent or Above Average 37.00 4 31.96 27 Average 40.37 33 35.04 28 Below Average or Poor 42.95 64 42.26 19

All comparisons within samples statistically significant except between "Excellent-Above Average" and "Average," in both samples.

Within each sample group, statistically significant dif' ferences were found for all comparisons except the 336 comparison of the "Excellent-Above Average" to "Average" groups. Since there were no responses indicating Governor Reagan was doing either "Excellent" or "Above Average" from the KPFA group, such comparisons were not possible for that sample. However, as a check, a similar test to that above was conducted betvreen those in the control group rating Governor Reagan either "Excellent" or "Above Average" to those rating him "Below Average" or "Poor." The mean score for the former was 30.$0 while the mean score for the latter was 39.67, producing a statistically significant difference.

Political Efficacy. This scale was designed to measure the degree to which the person feels he can in fluence the course of government by participation in the political process. The KPFA group was found to have a significantly higher ranking on this scale, with a mean score of 41.8 compared to a mean score of 39.5 for the control group, significant at the one per cent level of confidence. Further tabulation of the data revealed the older half of both groups ranked higher on the scale than the younger half, although this difference within the control group was not statistically significant. This would indi cate that in the KPFA group, those over 3& place more faith in political processes than do the younger group. 337 Demographic Information. Although it had been hypothesized that the KPFA subscriber group would be younger, the data would not support this hypothesis. However, there were pronounced differences between the two groups in educational level and income. As can be seen from Table 11, a much higher percentage of the KPFA subscriber group were college graduates (77«4 per cent) than the control group (59.5 per cent)., In addition, more than half of the subscriber group had graduate level education, while only a third of the control group were in this category.

TABLE 11 REPORTED EDUCATIONAL LEVEL Question 29 s "What is the highest level of education you completed?"

KPFA Subscribers Control Group Level Number Percent Number Percent

Some High School 1 1.0 3 4.1 High School Graduate 2 2.0 5 6 .7 Some College 21 19.6 20 27 .0 College Graduate 23 21.4 19 25..7 Graduate Study 60 56.0 25 33 ,3 No Answer — — 2 2..7

Total 107 100.0 74 100..0

More than half of the KPFA group reported family income greater than $12,000, while only about 35 per cent of the control group have such incomes, as can be seen in 33S Table 12. On the other hand, less than 20 per cent of the KPFA group reported incomes below $8,000, while more than 30 per cent of the control group fell below this level.

TABLE 12 REPORTED FAMILY INCOME Question 30s "Into what group would you place your total- family income?"

KPFA Subscribers Control Group Income Response Number Percent Number Percent

Below $5,000 9 8.4 12 16.2 $5,000 to 8,000 12 11.2 11 14.9 $8,000 to 12,000 28 26.2 25 33.8 $12,000 to 18,000 26 24.3 14 18.9 Over $18,000 32 29.9 12 16.2 Total 107 100.0 74 100.0

Source of News. Question 4 asked the subjects to name the sources of "most of your news about what is going on in the world." The results did not sustain Roper's Q findings, but the use of a mail survey as contrasted to Roper's use of personal interview may account for this difference. In all categories except television signifi cantly greater percentages were found than did Roper. Between the two groups in the present study, the only

Roper, p. 2. 339 statistically significant differences were found in the use of television and talking to people, both of which were lower in the KPFA group.

Better Newspaper. Both groups in the survey selected the New York Times as doing "a better job of reporting news/8 rather than any local newspaper. Other newspapers receiving five or more mentions were Christian Science Monitor and the San Francisco Chronicle.

TABLE 13 REPORTED USE OF NEWS MEDIA Question 4s "Where do you usually get most of your news about what is going on in the world?"

KPFA Control Response Subscribers Group Roper 196$

Newspapers 74.3$ 63.9$ 49$ Radio 46.7$ 45.9$ 25$ Television 40.2$ 54.1$ 59$ Magazines 39.3$ 39.2$ 7$ Talking to People 22.4$ 31.1$ 5$ Percentages total to more than 100$ because of selection of more than one choice. 340

TABLE 14 NEWSPAPER DOING A BETTER JOB REPORTING NEWS Question 5 s "If you think a better job of reporting news is done by any particular newspaper, name that newspaper.

KPFA Subscribers Control Group Newspaper Number Percent Number Percent

New York Times 39 36.4 18 24.3 San Francisco Chronicle 20 18.7 13 17.6 Christian Science Monitor 8 7.5 5 6.8 Other Papera 23 21.5 17 23.0 No Answer 30 28.0 25 33.8 Percentages exceed 100 per cent because of multiple answers. ^Choices receiving fewer than five mentions were not separately tabulated.

Better News on Television. Question 6 asked for a selection of a television station doing a better job of reporting news, if "you think a better job of reporting news is done by any particular newspaper." Apparently a quarter of the KPFA group and nearly a third of the control group could not select any one station as "doing a better job," and did not answer. Educational station KQED was selected more often in both groups, nearly three times as often as the most popular commercial station. It should be noted that KQED had produced an outstanding news pro gram during the San Francisco newspaper strike in 196$ and has received substantial grants from the Ford Foundation 341 to continue a nightly one-hour program of news and analy sis. It would seem that this program has high support among residents of the Bay Area.

TABLE 15 TELEVISION STATION DOING A BETTER JOB REPORTING NEWS Question 6; "If you think a better job of reporting news is done by any particular television station, name that television station."

KPFA Subscribers Control Group Station (Affiliation) Number Percent Number Percent

KQED (Educational) 73 67.6 23 36.8 KRON (NBC) 4 3.7 3 10.5 KPIX (CBS) 1 1.0 10 13.2 KGO (ABC) 1 1.0 4 5.3

No Answer 2B 26.7 24 31.6 Indicated Radio Stn. 2 2.6

Better Public Affairs Progamming on Television. When asked to name a station doing a better job of public affairs programming (defined on the questionnaire as "dis cussions and analysis of current problems"), KQED was selected by more than half of the control group and by more than three-quarters of the KPFA group. The latter group named no commercial stations in response to this question, as shown by Table 16. Outstanding Total Programming on Television. When asked to name a station whose total programming is out standing, KQED was named more often than any other sta tion, although it lost the three-and four-to-one advantage 342 it had in previous questions. More respondents left this question blank, possibly because it called for an 'butstanding" rather than "better" ranking.

TABLE 16 TELEVISION STATION DOING A BETTER JOB IN PUBLIC AFFAIRS PROGRAMMING Question 8; "If you think a better job of public affairs programming (discussions and analysis of current problems) is done by any particular television station, name that station."

KPFA Subscribers Control Group Station (Affiliation) Number Percent Number Percent

KQED (Educational) 34 78.5 39 51.3 KRON (NBC) 8 10.5 KPIX (CBS) 8 10.5 KTVU (Independent) 1 1.3 No Answer 23 21.5 19 25.0 Indicated radio stn. 4 5.3

TABLE 17 OUTSTANDING TOTAL PROGRAMMING ON A TELEVISION STATION Question 10; "If there is a television station whose total programming is outstanding in your opinion, name that station."

KPFA Subscribers Control Group Station (Affiliation) Number Percent Number Percent

KQED (Educational) 69 64.5 16 21.0 KRON (NBC) 3 3.9 KPIX (CBS) 6 7.9 KGO (ABC) 1 1.3 KTVU (Independent) 1 1.3 No Answer 38 35.5 47 61.8 343 Better News on Radio. When asked for a radio station doing a better job of reporting news, more than three-quarters of the subscriber group named KPFA. KCBS, the station on the "all-news" format, led the list of commercial stations, but even among the control group,

KPFA was named almost as often as KCBS.

TABLE 18

RADIO STATION DOING A BETTER JOB REPORTING NEWS

Question 1% "If you think a better job of reporting news is done by any particular radio sta tion, name that station."

KPFA Subscribers Control Group Station Number Percent Number Percent

KPFA 8la 75.0 10 13.2 KCBS 7 6.5 11 14.5 KGO 2 1.8 6 7.9 Other Stations 4 3.7 4 5.3 No Answer 14 13.0 44 57.9 aIncludes one response of KPFB, which duplicates the signal of KPFA.

Better Public Affairs on Radio. The response to the question about public affairs programming on radio was virtually the same as the response to the question about news, as can be seen from Table 19. Again, more than three-quarters of the subscribers listed KPFA, as did an eighth of the control group. No commercial sta tion received a substantial number of selections in this category. 344

TABLE 19 RADIO STATION DOING A BETTER JOB OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS PROGRAMMING

Question 9% "If you think a better job of public affairs programming is done by any particular radio station, name that station."

KPFA Subscribers Control Group Station Number Percent Number Percent

KPFA 33a 76.8 12a 15.8 KCBS 3 2.6 3 3.9 KGO 2 1.8 1 1.3 Other Stations 1 1.0 3 3.9 No Answer 19 17.6 55 72.4 aIncludes one response of KPFB.

Outstanding Total Programming on Radio. When asked to name a radio station whose total programming is outstanding, nearly two-thirds of the subscribers named KPFA. Other responses were scattered, and more than two- thirds of the control group did not designate any station in response to this question. As observed earlier, the change from "better" to "outstanding" in description may have been influential. 345

TABLE 20 RADIO STATION WHOSE TOTAL PROGRAMMING IS OUTSTANDING Question lis "If there is a radio station whose total programming is outstanding, in your opin ion, name that station."

KPFA Subscribers Control Group Station Number Percent Number Percent KPFA 69a 63.5 4 5.3 KGO 3 3.9 KCBS 1 1.0 2 2.6 KSAN 1 1.0 2 2.6 Other Stations 5 4.6 8 10.5 No Answer 33 30.5 57 75.0 aIncludes one response of KPFB. Two respondents in each group indicated two stations.

Conclusions The subscribers of KPFA tend to be more liberal in attitude and place more faith in political processes than does the average resident of the San Francisco metropolitan area. The average subscriber, as measured by this study, emerges more liberal in attitude than in a previous similar study conducted in 1955. The results of the findings using the Liberal- Conservative scale were given strong credibility by a / high correlation to both voting behavior and current estimates of the performance of the President and Governor of California. The more liberal KPFA group included only one person who reported he voted for Nixon, and none who 346

voted for Wallace. The remainder of the sample either did not vote or voted for liberal candidates such as

Humphreys, Cleaver, McCarthy or Gregory. They also were much less favorable in their opinion of the performance

of Nixon and Reagan, both Republicans. Governor Reagan, considered to be more conservative of the two, drew stronger disapproval of both the KPFA and the control group. Also, those expressing a stronger degree of dis approval were found to rank as more liberal on the scale.

The KPFA group was found to have more faith in the worth of political participation as measured by the political efficacy scale. However, comparisons of reported voting and scores on this scale failed to produce any significant differences between the voting and non-voting groups in either sample, casting some doubt as to the validity of the scale. On the other hand, the disaffection that many politically active liberals felt toward the

Democratic nominee, Humphrey, may have distorted these results, since the question related specifically to voting

behavior in the last presidential election.

KPFA subscribers were found to be better educated and from higher income groups than the control group.

However, the hypothesis that the average age of the sub scriber group would be below that of the general population was not supported by the results of the survey, and must

be rejected. 347 KPFA subscribers make extensive use of all mass media, naming newspapers most frequently as a source of news. As compared to the control group, they named tele vision and talking to people less and newspapers slightly more often. The New York Times was named most frequently by members of both groups as a newspaper "doing a better job reporting the news." KPFA subscribers consider both KPFA and educational television station KQJED far superior to commercial stations in the areas of news, public affairs, and total program ming. Surprisingly, KQED also was selected three to four times more often in these categories by the control group, although a quarter gave no answer for news or public affairs, and more than sixty per cent did not indicate any television station as having "outstanding total pro gramming." Only in public affairs did the control group name KPFA more often than commercial stations, and the majority did not name any station in radio in these categories. The acceptance of KPFA among its subscribers is quite high, shown by the fact that more than three- quarters named KPFA as a station doing a better job in news, and also in public affairs. Nearly two-thirds named KPFA as a radio station whose total programming is outstanding. 343 The overall picture of the KPFA subscriber, then, is that of a highly educated person with a higher than average income. He finds the programming of noncommer cial stations more acceptable than that of the commercial stations. He is more liberal in political opinions, and probably more active in governmental processes. CHAPTER X

KPFA AMD OTHER STATIONS KPFA, the original Pacifica station, has been controversial, provocative, and original, making it an unusual radio station in the United States. It is an abrupt departure from the normal commercial station, in that it programs what it believes the listeners want and/or need to hear, not what the advertiser wants to have aired. It is concerned with the pressing issues of the times, not in the widest possible audience. It also is unlike most other educational stations. Its deep involvement in a variety of controversial subjects set it apart from most educational stations. Also where the normal educational stations are content to follow their commercial cousins in format and program style— even to the practice of limiting programs to fit time periods, KPFA has tried new program forms and discarded the clock-oriented format. If a program runs ten or fif teen minutes beyond its scheduled time to conclude a discussion, no one worries about this—the program simply runs on to its natural conclusion. If the tape breaks, there is no polished announcement of "technical 349 350 difficulties prevent us from bringing you the program scheduled for this time"—the announcer simply states, "the tape just broke. In a minute we'll have it fixed." Theme music is not used—programs simply begin.

The Establishment of Other Pacifica Stations The idea, format and philosophy of the Pacifica stations was originated at KPFA. The founders of KPFA intended to establish other stations, but we have seen in Chapter VI how that goal failed in 1956. However, the idea was kept alive, and three years later, KPFK, Los Angeles, came on the air. William Webb was chiefly responsible for organizing the station's subscriber group in Southern California, but after the Construction Permit had been granted to Pacifica Foundation, he and the Board had a difference of opinion about the degree of control to be exercised by the Board over the new station, Webb favoring loosely affiliated, autonomous operation. Both the Board and its legal counsel pointed out that this would not be permitted by the FCC, and Webb ultimately resigned over the issue. The station came on the air June 28, 1959, with Terry Drinkwater as station manager. Initially the station used a power of 75 KW, later increased to 115 KW, making it one of the most powerful FM stations in Southern California. 351 The station in Los Angeles was the result of five years of planning, and a great deal of hard work on the part of both Pacifica officials and volunteer workers in the Los Angeles area. The New York station literally fell in Pacifica's lap. WBAI was originally owned by millionaire Louis Schweitzer, a somewhat unusual man who dreamed of operating a "good" radio station—one that had significant programs, rather than the commer cial trivia he found so common to New York's radio sta tions. His station did fairly well at this kind of pro gramming, so long as he personally exercised a high degree of supervision. But it was not a commercial success until the New York newspaper strike of December, 195$, when the station had all the advertising it could place, but Schweitzer was horrified at the sound. About that time, he read of the new station soon to go on the air in Los Angeles and its unusual programming. Since what he read fitted perfectly with his ideas about what a radio station ought to be, he called Trevor Thomas (Pacifica's President) and offered to make a gift of WBAI to Pacifica. Thomas was astonished, but it did not take the Board long to come to a decision."'" Pacifica began operation of WBAI January 10, I960.

"'""WBAI in the Sky," Time, January 25, I960, p. 5$. 352 With the inauguration of the Los Angeles station, the "mid-way link" that had been proposed for Fresno became highly desirable. Several studies were made, some encouraging, as to sites that could receive the signals of both KPFK and ICPFA clearly. If such a location could be found, a midway station could be used for off- the-air relay of programs from one station to the other at minimum cost, in addition to providing Pacifica pro gramming to the southern portion of the Central Valley of California. About the same time, application was filed by Pacifica for a station in Washington, D,C. (October 26, 1959). A competing application was filed by a former employee of Pacifica, then another from American Univer sity. The difficulty with the SISS, the substantial questions raised by the FCC about financing the stations, the uncertainty about license renewals for the existing three stations, and the slim financial resources of the Foundation—all these factors convinced the Board to abandon plans for these new stations. A station in Seattle, KRAB, has been sometimes referred to as an "affiliated station," in that it uses much>of Pacifica's programming in its broadcast schedule. 353 Although KRAB receives the programming under rather generous terms and has maintained a close relationship with many Pacifica officials, this station has no legal connection to Pacifica Foundation. In recent years, groups in two cities have be come active, intending to form stations licensed to Pacifica. These are Washington D.C. where Pacifica filed an application May 20, 196$, for a station on $9.3 mc? and Houston, Texas, filed April 15, 1969, for 90.1 mc. As of the date of this writing, neither application had been acted upon by the Commission. The Washington channel again is subject to a competing application, that of the National Education Foundation, a subsidiary organization of Christ Church.

Programming

Aside from the spread of the Pacifica philosophy of progra.ffi.ning from KPFA to the other Pacifica stations, the programming concepts pioneered by Lewis Hill and carried out through KPFA have undoubtedly influenced the course of radio and television in the United States.

This has been done in two areas; first, liberalizing the concept of what subject areas could be discussed on broadcast stations, and second, broadening the scope of educational stations, especially television, involving a programming concept aimed at the general public rather 354 than narrowly aimed at "in-school" programming intended for use by teachers and students in the classrooms.

The liberalizing trend of the content of broad cast programs has been developing over the past thirty years, pre-dating the beginning of KPFA. Undoubtedly, this trend would have been present even if the Pacifica stations had never come on the air. However, it should be apparent that Pacifica has been one of the most vigorous broadcasters in insisting that any subject could be dis cussed on radio so long as it was done with taste and seriousness. Reviewing the numerous FCC decisions and statements concerning programming concepts—in response to complaints about Pacifica"s programming—leads the researcher to the conclusion that the FCC was pushed into quite liberal positions that it would not have found had it not been for the provocative, yet high-quality pro gramming aired by the Pacifica stations. Here the FCC found programming that departed from the past standards, yet was intellectually defensible. Without this high quality, the FCC undoubtedly would have been far more hesitant to take such a strong stand defending the right of a station to air programs containing frank expressions, or involving subjects such as homosexuality.

The second area of influence, that of broadening the concept of educational stations, can be seen most clearly in Hill's role in the formation of the Bay Area 355

Educational Television Association (BAETA), the group responsible for the operation of educational television station KQED. The original radio stations licensed to educational institutions had been viewed as a means of extending the classroom beyond the campus. They aired classical music and broadcast lectures from the campus.

A few broadcasters talked about providing a cultural service to adults, but most of the stations adhered to the more narrow format. The FCC granted noncommercial licenses only to "educational institutions," using as a reference educational accrediting agencies.

To secure reservations of television channels for education, a number of national groups joined to form the Joint Council on Educational Television (JCET).

The primary thrust of the testimony of the representa tives of this group before the Commission was to reserve educational channels to be used by schools and colleges of the nation. This concept appalled Hill. One of the attorneys who had represented JCET, Seymour Krieger, on one occasion asked Hill for some thoughts about the most effective use of educational television channels. Hill's response was far ahead of his time, clearly pointing out the limited scope of existing "educational" stations?

In my view the first problem in developing educa tional TV is to get it completely separated from the history and organizations of "educational" broad casting. We must face the fact that the main use of university radio stations has been not to form a 356 cultural bridge between centers of learning and occupational classes in commercial radio. The edu cational stations have for so long served as a feeble mirror of commercial broadcasting that no tradition exists among them to give rise to a signi ficant educational TV. There is no evidence that these stations and their organizations (NAEB, etc.), even understand the basic functional obstacles to development of new art forms in time-block radio. Moreover, the people in charge of educational sta tions are tied either to state legislatures or to boards of trustees which inevitably represent con trols and tendencies close to the commercial and more conservative part of the community. For all these reasons it will be disastrous in my opinion if educational TV is linked up to the existing groups and tradition in educational radio. These are not, as you see, altogether relevent remarks if we are concerned about furthering the cause of the JCET„ The fact is, I think, that on the record of so-called educational broadcasting the JCET cannot make much of a case. If the object is to obtain a significant cul tural development in TV, the first question to be settled is; how can the serious artists of the country be interested in using it as a medium, —as an art medium, that is. Everything in the end will hang on answering that question properly. . . . The time-block concept ... is precisely one of the basic conditions associated with commercialism which has driven serious art away from radio, and will drive it away from TV. Any simple example will illustrate this condition. Suppose the program is a drama. A first requisite for significant dramatic art is the integration of the actor to the medium on his own terms, not without direction, but with freedom to act. In American radio, however, the actor is as it were a puppet suspended from the con trol room: acting must follow the production. The reason for this is, of course, that actual direction of the dramatic performance must embody cuts, pacing, etc., calculated to confine it or extend it exactly to a predetermined time. The time-block is the dominating condition. This at once removes any possibility of a true acting situation, and as a result American radio has no truly original and creative acting, no great actors. For this same reason it has no original literature of any signifi cance—why should any serious artist write drama, or adapt good drama to be subjected to these conditions? 357 The final consequence may be seen in NAEB's effort to find meaningful drama to put on its tape network? it had to turn to the BBC. The reason drama is some times extremely good and original on BBC is that the production follows the acting, because there is no time-block concept; and over a period of time serious artists have been attracted to the medium there. In fact, most of the very best writers in Great Britain do one thing or another for the BBC.

The fact is that America has in very limited quan tity a highly developed and vitally significant literary culture, music culture, and political culture Only a littie of it is connected with the universities but neither is it to be found in the various metro politan bohemias — that day is long past. The real poets and musicians are working like hell at every conceivable job, and most of the best political thinkers are not in politics. These people are pro ducing continually the real stuff of our century. They are by no means unknown, but they are probably unknown, or an obscure threat to Mr. Young and the Book-of-the-Month Club. The problem is to create a situation with regard to TV in which these people can go to work on their own, and see some point in doing so. My argument would be, then, that the first matter for the FCC to consider is not a definition of educa tional programming, but is rather a definition of the practical conditions which will make possible creative programming of any kind. This means to define the situation in which artists will work, and will want to work, not from a monetary but from an esthetic and moral standpoint. It is at once apparent that any real answer to this challenge would embroil the FCC in political difficulties of its own which I am sure no one in Washington will deliberately court. Perhaps it would be possible for Mr. Coy [FCC Chairman], if he saw the problem in these dimensions, to persuade the Ford, Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundations to go to work on a coordinated plan for TV. This would involve a number of stations around the country . . . partly supported by audience subscription, partly by sub sidy; and a production center to supply good film in quantity. It would require long-term support, for there will be no shortcut to really significant TV if it ever comes about. If the Foundation would not undertake this job, it would remain entirely feasible, if properly planned, for the government 35S itself to subsidize such activity. The object in either case would be to establish the conditions for both production and broadcast in which creative programming could be pursued entirely for its own sake. But I will not elaborate on such hypotheses (though I would certainly cherish a real occasion to do so someday) because it is obvious to both of us, I suppose, that they are out of the question. Sorry I can't be more helpful. I cannot escape the conclusion that until the problem is tackled at these basic levels it has not been seen.2 Hill's last several paragraphs touch a concept that was to be basic to the Carnegie Commission's report of fifteen years later. Hill's comments were based on his experience with KPFA. He gave these ideas freely, to all who would listen. He made numerous speeches and participated in a great many conferences in the Bay Area between 1950 and 1957, the year of his death. He was particularly active in the organization of the Bay Area Educational Television Association (BAETA) in its early stages. The first interest in operating a station on channel 9 in San Francisco was on the part of Vaughn Seidel, superintendent of Alameda County Schools, cover ing an area of Oakland and a number of cities to the south. He conceived the station as providing "in-school" instructional television to aid the educational system. However, in reserving the educational channels, the FCC had stated:

2Lewis Hill, letter to Seymour Krieger, September 3, 1951. 359 It is recognized that there are more institutions than channels, and these institutions must co-operate to secure the equitable use of the channels.3 In view of this, Seidel realized that it was highly unlikely that a license would be granted to the public schools of one county in a nine county metropolitan area, and so determined to broaden the group. At the same time, some officials at the University of California at Berkeley showed some interest in activating the channel for use of the extension program of the University. Ultimately, these two groups held a joint meeting, and then combined in an effort to present a united educational front to the FCC in securing the license. At this point, Hill entered the situation. Dis tressed at the prospect that the channel might become another typical "educational" station, devoted to tele casting instruction from the classroom, or to the class room, he began discussing a wider concept with members of the BAETA group. He reviewed a discussion with George Pettit, assistant to the President of the University of California in a letter to Norman Jorgensen: I have argued with Pettit that there is a vital issue between the kind of educational broadcasting which merely services the cirricula of institutions, and another kind which seeks to provide genuine creative leadership. The mediocrity so characteristic of American educational broadcasting is inextricably associated with the former approach. I have argued

^FCC, Third Order and Report, Television Allo cations, 1951. 360 that listener-sponsorship, as a supplemental revenue concept, should be joined with a definite intention to do original creative programming in TV. All this was at first wholly contrary to the concept Pettit himself had advanced, which was of a station com mitted and limited simply to a servicing of various of the collegiate extension cirricula.^- Further on in the same letter, Hill stated that if the television group did not propose any programming more creative than that envisioned by Seidel and Pettit, he was considering filing a competing application for channel 9 on behalf of Pacifica. However, there were substantial doubts on the part of legal counsel as to whether an organization such as Pacifica could be licensed a noncommercial educational television station. There fore, Hill filed application for a UHF television channel in San Francisco. In the UHF application, Hill listed his Advisory Board, including some of the most prominent educators and civic leaders of the area, as those who would contribute to the high quality of the proposed programming, which was quite similar in scope to that of KPFA. It was a most impressive application. The move was an obvious bluff, as the Foundation had no resources to put such a station on the air. Never theless, the other educational group, also having slim resources, looked upon Hill's application with alarm,

^Lewis Hill, letter to Norman Jorgensen, April 29, 1952. 361 since its activation would depend on contributions from sever.al of the same sources they planned to tap to con struct their station. This potential competition for money gave Hill the attention he desired from the BAETA. In several meetings with principals in the BAETA group, especially Seidel and Dr. George Pettit of the University of California, Hill discussed his concept of a cultural educational service to the community. He demanded that the controlling Board of the proposed sta tion be broadened to include representatives of the com munity as well as the educational institutions. He dis cussed his concept of listener-sponsorship as a means of financial support. Apparently, he was persuasive, for as the group reorganized, each of these concepts was written into its charter and specified in the application filed by BAETA for channel 9. With this accomplished, Pacifica asked the Commission to dismiss its application for a UHF channel. The resulting station, under the guidance of James Day, has been a leader in the use of an educational channel to serve the entire community of viewers. It broadcasts both "in-school" instructional programming (during school hours) as well as cultural and public affairs programming of high quality during the evening hours for adult viewing. Perhaps, through the normal process of finding its place in the community, KQED would 362 ultimately have come to this type of program service.

It is the opinion of this researcher that it was forced to dedicate itself to this from the start by Lewis Hill.

It was successful with this type of programming, with the result that its programming was widely imitated throughout the country. Thus, the concepts of Hill were

an influence on the course of programming of educational television stations throughout the United States.

Listener-Sponsorship

As has been discussed in Chapter VIII, the con

cept of listener-sponsorship has never been able to fully

support the Pacifica stations. Although to some extent, this is a matter of choice, it is debatable whether such financial support could ever serve as the sole support for such a station. As a result, the hypothesis that a

high quality radio service can be supported by contri

butions from listeners must be, at least partially, re

jected on the basis of this study.

On the other hand, as was pointed out above, the theory of listener-sponsorship has been involved in more stations than the Pacifica stations. Many educational

television stations, notably KQED, San Francisco5 KVIE,

Sacramento: KCET, Los Angeles; WQED, Pittsburgh; and WGBH,

Boston, use to some extent the concept of listener-

sponsorship to provide a portion of the financial support 363 for their stations. It was of interest to this researcher to determine how this concept came to be adopted by- educational television stations. As was pointed out above. Hill was very active in shaping the kind of station KQED would be and how it would be organized. The original charter incorporated the concept of listener-sponsorship. Dr. Pettit recalled: We were orying to raise money any way we couXd. Our sources were quite limited, and any prospect that could make us look good to the Commission w^-s accepted. Many on the original Board were familiar with KPFA's concept. But I don't recall that Hill ever directly suggested that we use his plan.5 But Hill wrote to his attorney: I have argued that listener-sponsorship, as a supplemental revenue concept, should be joined with a definite intention to do original creative pro gramming in TV. . . .The summary part of the conver sation expressed our concern that the audience- station relationship expressed by listener-sponsorship be developed in TV as well as radio, and our equal concern that educational broadcasting take the crea tive as against the institutional approach. I left Mr. Pettit with our view that if the proposed Channel 9 station was such as to further those objectives, Pacifica's relation to it would deserve study.6 Five months later, the By-Laws of the BAETA organization were amended to include "memberships" for "subscribers" at the rate of $10 per year.7

^Dr. George Pettit, personal interview, Berkeley, June 20, 1969. £ Lewis Hill, letter to Norman Jorgensen, April 29, 1952. ^By-Laws and Minutes of BAETA, in the records of Mr. George Pettit, Berkeley. 364

It should be pointed out, also, that several

members of the original committee to establish an edu

cational television station in San Francisco were quite

familiar with the operation of KPFA. These included

Roy Sorenson, Roger Sessions, and John May.

When James Day was hired as General Manager of

the station in 1953, he found the provision for subscriber

support already written into the By-Laws of the station

organization. To determine how it worked, he recalls,

he called on Hill for advice. At the time, Dick Moore

had just resigned from KPFA in the upheaval of the

summer of 1953, and Day hired him, making him membership

chairman of KQED.

When interviewed, Day stated that he did not

recall any other station using such a plan for financial

support. He commented that at the meetings of the NAEB

and NET, other station managers kidded him about "getting

money from his viewers," but as receipts from this source

began to provide a substantial part of the KQED budget,

he got less kidding and more requests for advice on how Q to do it.

Discussing the financial support of educational

g James Day, personal interview, San Francisco, June 4, 1969.

9Ibid. 365 stations in 1961, one authority commented about listener- subscriptions; Theoretically this should be the basis of support for ETV at least on the local level. Practically it just isn't so. Only one station today achieves any measure of financial help from this source. . . [footnote to this sentence reads;] KQED, San Francisco, which now has 12,000 member subscribers who contribute from $10 to $100 yearly. The income from this source now represents about forty per cent of that station's budget.10 The links between KPFA's use of such a plan, and its adoption by the KQED founders are so overwhelming as to make it quite reasonable to conclude that the plan of listener-sponsorship as conceived and developed by Lewis Hill was adapted and used by KQED. Since even by 1961, eight years after the establishment of KQED, no other station was using the plan of listener-subscriptions to any great extent, it is quite reasonable to conclude that it was first successfully used by an educational television station at KQED. It is also apparent that from KQED, the plan spread to other television stations in the country. There fore, it is the opinion of the writer that the plan of deriving funds from subscribers as used by a number of television stations was originated by Lewis Hill.

Lyle M. Nelson, "The Financing of Educational Television," in Wilbur Schramm (ed.), Educational Tele vision, the Next Ten Years. Stanford, Institute for Communications Research, 1962, p. 177. CHAPTER XI

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS This study has examined the Pacifica Foundation and one of its stations, KPFA, Berkeley, California. The station was established by a group of pacifists in 1949» dedicated to the ideal of a station where every viewpoint could be heard regardless of popularity, where the finest in music and literary art could be broadcast without sponsor interference, and where children's pro gramming would be constructive. The station was originally conceived as an AM station, but when it proved impossible to secure an AM frequency, an FM station was put on the air on an interim basis in 1949. After fifteen months, a financial crisis forced it to suspend broadcasting, but the listeners of the station rallied and provided enough funds to put the station back on the air with increased power. Later, assistance from the Fund for Adult Education was instru mental in providing financial stability in the early years of the station. The original structure of the station provided for equal participation in decision-making and equal 366 367 salaries for all staff members. These two principles proved to be unworkable. After several severe internal clashes over station policy's, the controlling body of the station was changed from staff members to a Board of

Directors selected from outside the station. The addi tion of stations in Los Angeles and New York led to the

Board dealing largely with broad policy matters and the appointment of Local Advisory Boards to deal with the major portion of local station affairs.

In 1963? the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee conducted hearings to determine the extent of Communist infiltration into the officers of Pacifica. A year later, the FCC also investigated this, along with other issues in passing on renewal of licenses of the West Coast

Pacifica stations. Asked to sign a non-Communist affi davit, the members of the Board of Directors and the officers of Pacifica responded with a statement of support for the principles of the U.S. Constitution, which was accepted by the FCC as sufficient evidence of qualifica tion to be a licensee. However, one employee of Pacifica resigned rather than be questioned under oath by an FCC examiner about possible Communist associations in his past.

The FCC also looked into programming on Pacifica stations. Although Pacifica admitted it had erred on two occasions, overall the programming was defended as being 363 within the rights of free expression. The serious nature of the programming in question and Pacifica's intelligent, reasoned defenses of their right to air provocative pro gramming led the FCC to issue a strong statement support ing Pacifica. Recognizing that "such provocative pro gramming . o . may offend some listeners," the Commission concluded that refusal to renew Pacifica's licenses because of this would have the result that "only the wholly inoffensive, the bland could gain access to the radio microphone or TV camera ..." and would be con- i trary to the Constitution and the Communications Act. However, two years later, the Commission in a split vote gave short-term renewals to the West Coast stations for failure to exercise adequate supervision over programming. With this one exception, the Commission has made numerous favorable statements and decisions in response to complaints about programming aired by Pacifica stations. These decisions have upheld Pacifica's right to air provocative programming reflecting a wide variety of viewpoints and frank language in artistic performances. The financial support of the station is largely the subscriptions from listeners on a voluntary basis. No commercials are aired. The primary incentive for listeners to subscribe is a moral one, but it is evident

"'"FCC, "in re Applications of Pacifica Foundation," 1964, paragraph 5. 369 to most listeners that unless sufficient numbers sub scribe, the station cannot continue on the air. The station's programming has maintained a con sistent high quality, departing from usual broadcasting standards and practices. Time limits are quite flexible and programs continue to their natural conclusion. Pro gram subjects are provocative, controversial, and stimu lating, and include many of the outstanding public figures as well as some of the nation's most eminent scholars. Critical response to the station's programs has been overwhelmingly favorable. Some of the nation's most distinguished newspapers have printed editorials praising the programming of the stations and defending their right to air it. The station has survived because there were people willing to work for low wages, and often without wages, because they believed in what the station represented. Many volunteers participate in the activities of the sta tion. Programming concepts of the station have been in fluential in the establishment of other Pacifica stations in Los Angeles and New York, as well as influencing the direction of programming of educational television sta tions of the country. The station's programming philosophy has been influential in determining the course of educational television stations in the United States, especially KQED, 370 San Francisco. Following the reservations of ETV channels in 1952, Lewis Hill was quite active in the formation of KQED as a community station airing informative and cul tural programming rather than confining its telecasting to "in-school" instruction.

Hypotheses of the Study Four hypotheses were advanced at the beginning of the study. The first was that listener contributions can successfully sustain a radio service devoted to specialized programming including widely divergent view points. On the basis of this study, it is difficult to draw a clear conclusion in regard to this hypothesis. In the past five years, KPFA has operated at a deficit. Income from subscribers has provided less than sixty per cent of the station's budget, although contributions other than subscriptions have been substantial. On the face of it, the station would seem to be proof that this hypothesis should be accepted, in view of the fact that it has existed more than twenty years. Nevertheless, a large indebtedness has accumulated. Therefore, on the basis of this study, the hypothesis is rejected, although conditionally. The second hypothesis was that a listener-supported station will be able to offer intellectually challenging programming of a completely different nature than that 371

offered by commercial broadcasting stations in the United

States. This hypothesis, on the basis of the study, is

supported. KPFA has been shown to be a station present

ing programming of interest to the individual listener

in the areas of public affairs, music, literature, and

discussions. It is the writer's conclusion that its

record of intellectually challenging programming is far

superior to that of the typical station in the United

States. It is this aspect of Pacifica that has attracted

loyal listeners who support its operation. Critical

reviews included in Chapter VIII attest to the superiority

of KPFA's programming.

The third hypothesis is that KPFA, in broadcasting

a wide variety of views on controversial matters and frank

language in artistic performance, has secured for all

broadcasters far-reaching statements by the FCC defending the right to air serious programs in these areas. Chapter

VII discussed the various FCC investigations of Pacifica,

reporting the significant portions of the statements and

decisions issued by the FCC in response to the investiga

tions. These decisions have uniformly upheld the right

of Pacifica, and other stations, to broadcast a wide

range of opinions on controversial issues, as well as

frank language when used in proper context. The influence

of KPFA on other stations in this regard was discussed

extensively in Chapter X. It is the writer's conclusion 372 that this hypothesis has been adequately supported by the findings of the study. The final hypothesis concerned the subscribers of KPFA, predicting that they would be more politically active and liberally oriented than non-subscribers of the Bay Area drawn at random- On the basis of results from a mailed questionnaire, discussed in Chapter IX, this hypothesis is accepted.

Suggestions for Further Research Research for this study led to the much broader question of the liberal orientation of the San Francisco community. Home of the "topless" dancer, the "hippie" movement, and the Sierra Club, San Francisco is the most cosmopolitan, yet the most tolerant of the major metro politan areas of the United States. It would seem in order for a study to concentrate on determining what effects, if any, the presence of KPFA has had in estab lishing this liberal tolerance of an entire community. Is it because of KPFA and KQED that San Francisco has taken on these attitudes, or is it because of the prior existence of these community attitudes that KPFA and KQED have been so readily accepted here? Another area deserving further study would involve a controlled content analysis of KPFA (or other Pacifica stations), covering programming over an extended length 373 of time. The writer became painfully aware of the limita tions of the present study in attempting to record the wide diversity of programming and the intellectual chal lenge present in many of the programs aired by KPFA. Substantial investigation of the basic plan of listener-subscription as a means of partial support of educational television stations is suggested by this study. With the all-channel receiver provision greatly increasing the potential audience of UHF ETV stations in eastern cities, it would seem to be an ideal time for such stations to investigate the potential of such a plan for support. The experience of KQED in San Francisco would seem to the writer to be an ideal starting point for such further investigation. The total experience of Pacifica in being able to air provocative programming, largely because of absence of sponsor restrictions, would suggest that further re search might investigate the adoption of the "magazine" concept for commercial radio and television stations as a means of providing more programming freedom. Such a concept, as used by the ITA in England, prohibits the direct sponsoring programs by advertisers, commercials being limited to between programs or rotated in mid--program positions. The experience of Pacifica suggests such a plan might result in more freedom of expression in 374 broadcast programs; however, more research is needed to support this theory.

Another area deserving study would be that of the motivation of subscribers in order to enable the stations to more successfully make their appeals for the essential funds in the most efficient way possible. A study of those who listen and contribute, compared to those who listen but do not contribute would be a highly significant one in terns of the future of this type of station.

The writer was somewhat disappointed with the results of the "political efficacy" scale, as reported in Chapter IX. The conclusions drawn from this research are in need of more research to substantiate and improve the technique employed.

Finally, the future establishment of two other

Pacifica stations—in Houston and Washington, D.C., along with the present stations in Los Angeles and New York, holds promise for rewarding studies of other Pacifica stations in other locations and circumstances. It would be useful to know the effect these other metropolitan areas have on the Pacifica idea, and the modification of programming that results. APPENDIX A

PROGRAM SCHEDULE, KPFA-INTERIM, September 1949.

Sunday Monday 3:00 Schedule Review 3:00 Schedule Review 3s02 News Headlines 3:02 News Headlines 3:05 First Concert 3:05 Concert Commentary 4s00 Miscellany 3:15 First Concert 4^15 Men and Issues 4:15 Miscellany 4:30 Cushion Period 4:30 Ghandi and Peace 4:45 Children's Nature Forum 5:00 Indian Tales 5:15 Family Folk Songs 5:15 Let's Make Music 5:45 Indian Tales 5:30 Pony Pegasus 6:00 News Headlines 6:00 News Headlines 7:30 Ask Pop 7:30 Folk Music Series 7:45 Once Upon a Time 7:45 Commentators Series 8:00 Commentators Panel 8:00 Young Artists Concert 8:30 Golden Voices 8:30 Inside KPFA 9:00 Drama 9:00 Second Concert 10:30 News Headlines and 10:30 News Headlines and Sign Off Sign Off

Tuesday Wednesday 3:00 Schedule Review 3:t:00 Schedule Review 3:02 News Headlines 3::02 News Headlines 3:05 First Concert 3:;05 Concert Commentary 4:00 Miscellany 3:i:15 First Concert 4:15 Bay Area Concert Preview4:15 Miscellany 4:45 Indian Tales 4j.: 30 Beethoven Concert Series 5:15 Folk Songs for Children 5:i s 00 Indian Tales 5:45 Once Upon a Time 5:i s 15 Lets Make Music 6:00 News Headlines 5:;:45 Story Time 6::00 News Headlines 7:30 Folk Music Series 7:45 Commentators Series 7:30 Folk Music Series 8:00 Great Books 7:45 Commentators Series 8:45 Cushion Period 8:00 KPFA Roundtable 9:00 Meet the Composer 8:45 Cushion Period 9:15 Composer's Concert 9:00 Violin Classics 10:30 News Headlines and 9:30 Rare Records Sign Off 10:30 News Headlines and Sign off

375 376 Thursday Friday 3:00 Schedule Review 3:00 Schedule Review 3:02 News Headlines 3:02 News Headlines 3:05 First Concert 3:05 Concert Commentary 4:15 Miscellany 3:15 First Concert 4:30 Bay Area Concert Preview4:15 Miscellany 5:00 Indian Tales 4:30 Music 5 :15 Folk Songs for Children 4:45 Growing Up with Books 5:45 Once Upon a Time 5:00 Indian Tales 6:00 News Headlines 5:15 Let's Make Music 5:30 Do You Remember 7:30 Folk Music Series 5:45 Story Time 7:45 Commentators Series 6 s 00 News Headlines 8:00 Critics Circle 8:4 5 Cushion Period 7:30 Folk Music Series 9 sOO Concert Commentary 7:45 Commentators Series 9:15 Second Concert 8:00 Artists Concert 10:30 News Headlines and 9:00 Drama (repeat) Sign Off 9:30 Second Concert 10:30 News Headlines and Sign Off

Saturday 3:00 Schedule Review 3:02 News Headlines 3:05 First Concert 4:15 Miscellany 4:30 Bay Area Concert Preview 5:00 Indian Tales 5:15 Let's Make Music 5:30 Children's Playhouse 6:00 News Headlines 7:30 Through the Looking Glass 8:00 Folk Music Series 8:30 BBC Drama 9:45 Cushion Period 10:00 Contemporary Music 10:30 News Headlines and Sign Off ' APPENDIX B

PUBLIC SERVICE PROGRAMS BROADCAST BY KPFK September 17, 1962 to January 6, 1963 Broadcast September 17 to September 30» 1962 PAN AFRICANISM AND AFRICAN SOCIALISM; Ghana, as a new country, is examined within this framework in a penetrating talk by St. Clair Drake, professor of Sociology, Roosevelt University, Chicago. RICHARD NIXON TALKS TO A HIGH SCHOOL; In a soup-to-nuts talk to a high school political action club, the first of its kind in California. GOVERNOR BROWN TALKS TO A HIGH SCHOOL; Same club, but an obviously different talk. BORN TO LIVE; A documentary based on the voices of people interviewed by Studs Terkel — winnowed from over eight years of talking with the famous and the unknown. The theme is the hopes and anxieties of people in the nuclear age. Prix Italia, 1962. THE SOUL OF THE WHITE ANT: A documentary of Eugene Marais® Transvaal study of insect psychology. This strange and fascinating program was produced by the South African Broadcasting Co.

CALIFORNIA 1862: This is a series dealing with the history and geography of the state of California dramatically reconstructed from writings of a cen tury ago. THE STRUGGLE FOR ATOMIC POWER IN SONOMA COUNTY; A docu mentary concerning the controversy of the appli cation of the Pacific Gas and Electric Company to build an atomic power plant in the Bodega Head area of northern California. This documentary contains excerpts from public hearings and interviews with local residents and a number of "experts." One of the most controversial questions in California and whatever the outcome, the ramifications are great.

377 37S COUNTERFORCE, MADMEN AND HIGH SCHOOL KIDS; A talk by psychiatrist Dr. Jerome Frank which, among other things, compares the arms race between nations to the problem of alcoholism in individuals. ON WHOM SHALL TELSTAR SHINE? A discussion with the former FCC chief economist, Dallas Smythe, who challenges the role of the ATT in the communications satellite controversy. WORLD WITHOUT THE BOMB; An unusual and impassioned plea from Ghana, including the voices of many people who attended the Accra Conference. UNMENTIONED MYTHS—or, THE BIRTH OF A CONTROVERSY; This program presents first, a controversial speech by W. H. Ferry of the Center for the Study of Demo cratic Institutions, followed by editorials, reports, columns and comments by notables. By this simple but effective presentation the listener can judge for himself what happens when selectivity and bias operate in reporting and comment.

Broadcast October 1 to October 14. 1962 HIGHLANDER FOLK SCHOOL: A documentary study based on recordings concerning the school in Monteagle, Tennessee, that has carried on the work of educa tion and integration for over thirty years against a background of almost continual harassment and litigation. CIVIL LIBERTIES AND THE COURTS; This is a series program in which the counsel for the American Civil Liber ties Union of Los Angeles reviews cases pending before or decided by the Supreme Court of the U.S. DR. BROCK CHISHOLM— LEARNING TO LIVE IN A NEW KIND OF WORLD; A talk by the former director of the world health organization in which he appeals to the human imagination to find radical solutions for the problems of population gain and resource loss. (A program often requested for rebroadcast). MEETING OF MINDS; This program was produced originally by Steve Allen for television. It deals with the nature of crime and punishment and the opinions on those subjects of a distinguished panel consisting of Aristotle, Montaigne, Dostoevsky, Hegel, Freud, and Clarence Darroiv. (After the program was ready, 379 it was judged "too controversial," and Mr. Allen asked Pacifica Radio if we were interested. We were, and it is one of the best programs we have broadcast). HUTCHINS ON ZUKERKANDLs Dr. Robert Hutchins, Director for the Study of Democratic Institutions, describes a new philosophy of "noninvolvement" based on the nonexistent but alarmingly appropriate philosophy of one Dr. Alexander Zukerkandl. SYNANON—HOUSE OF HOPE: Pacifica Radio was perhaps the first to give wide public information about the now-famed house in Santa Monica where narcotics addicts set about curing themselves. A volunteer staff member for Pacifica lived in the house two weeks and prepared this startling documentary. CULBERT OLSON ON FREE THOUGHT: The late governor of California sums up his basic attitudes and philo sophy of life. This was recorded just a few months prior to his death.

Broadcast October 15 to October 28, 1962. WAR, YES! SEX, NO! Guy Endore, author of a forthcoming biography on the Marquis de Sade, protests that perpetrators of war get boulevards named after them and the Marquis, who never killed anyone, has his name enshrined in the jargon of pathology. CHIEF JUSTICE WARREN—CIVIL LIBERTIES AND THE MILITARY: The James Madison lecture at NYU given by Chief Justice Earl Warren. BIRTH CONTROL AND PUBLIC POLICY: A recording of a panel discussion under the auspices of the Planned Parent hood Federation. NEWTON MINOW—THE BROADCASTING INDUSTRY AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST: This is a rebroadcast of the now famed "vast wasteland" speech by the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. This was his first public address in 1961 to the National Asso ciation of Broadcasters in Washington and reflects his philosophy toward the public service role of the broadcasting media. 3 SO NEGRO ADVANCEMENT—'WHICH WAY NOW? A tense and heated discussion between representatives of the NAACP and the Muslim movement. SECURITY AND MASS PSYCHOSIS: Clinical psychologist John Whitman Sears speaking before the American Pshcholo' gical Association with some harsh and telling words about the preoccupation with security.

Broadcast October 29 to November 11, 1962 CALIFORNIANS OF MEXICAN DESCENT: Ten documentaries dealing with the history, culture, problems, view points and aspirations of the single largest so- called minority group in California. SOUTH VIETNAM? A six-part series on the contemporary history and problems of that country. A DIALOGUE ON EXISTENTIAL PSYCHOLOGY; A discussion among three outstanding American exponents—Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, and Rollo May. CASTRO'S OPPOSITION; An interview with Manola Ray, leader of the Castro Opposition group and variously regarded as "Fidelismo without Fidel" or, the Demo cratic left's answer to Castroism. CUBA NOW: An interview with Dr. J. P. Morray who is just returned from two years in Cuba where he lectured in political science at the University of Havana. JUGGERNAUT: A dramatized free adaptation of Fred Cook's NATION article on the warfare state. A witty and wild exploration of the union between military and business. GEORGE LINCOLN ROCKWELL: A candid and revealing inter view with the leader of the American Nazi Party at his Arlington headquarters.

Broadcast November 12 to November 25. 1962 THE INCREDIBLE EDGAR CAYCE: Cayce's amazing occult powers were attested to by many apparently reliable people. This is a conversation about the incredi bilities with Cayce's son Hugh Lynn Cayce. 381 THE NEW CLASS: The book by Milovan Djilas is discussed and reviewed by Konni Zilliacus, British Labor M. P. QUESTIONING UNQUESTIONED ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT NATIONAL DEFENSE Professor Charles Osgood, the author of the idea that tensions are reduced by initiatives rather than reactions, discussed this application to defense. "UNWORK" UNPLANNED, AND OTHER UNION PROBLEMS; The old yet new and growing problem of making work is dis cussed by Max Dombrow of the AFL-CIO. MIGRANT'S CHILDREN; An interview with the director of a unique self-help child care center for migrant workers in Fort Pierce, Florida. THE COPS CAN'T COME IN HERE: Recorded on New York's lower East Side, this discussion—if it can be called that—reflects the hostility and suspicion of a "bopping" gang toward social workers who come to the slums. THE FIRST AMENDMENT—CORE OF OUR CONSTITUTION: The renowned talk by Alexander Meiklejohn originally made before a Congressional Committee in Washington (This program won an Ohio State Award for Pacifica's KPFA). LET US NOW PRAISE FAMOUS MEN: A dramatic reading of James Agee's lyrical study of the Southern share cropper's way of life in the depression years of the 30's.

Broadcast November 26 to December 9» 1962 TWO FACES OF FEDERALISM: A discussion between Andrew Shonfield and Robert Hutchins about the two direc tions in constitutional government. EMOTIONAL INVOLVEMENT: A talk by Psychiatrist Dr. Ralph Greenson on healthy and neurotic involvement. ABORTION AND THE LAV/: A recording of a discussion by a psychologist, a psychiatrist, a minister and the secretary of the citizens committee for humane abortion laws. 332 WHAT YOU SHOULD LOOK FOR WHEN YOU BUILD OR BUY YOUR HOME? One of a series of 13 programs entitled "Consumer Problems" produced under a grant from Consumers Union. ENVIRONMENT; A series of programs produced on material from the International Design Conference in Aspen, Colorado and includes Robert Weaver, Harrison Brown, Oscar Lewis, Herbert Muller, Dr. Karl Menninger and many artists, architects, sociologists, etc. THE CAUSES OF C. WRIGHT MILLS; A tribute/to the late sociologist by some of the people who knew and loved him. TANGENTS OF TECHNOLOGY: Aldous Huxley leads a discussion of the ecological effects of technology. The par ticipants are Ritchie Calder, Father Walter Ong, W. H. Ferry, Harry Ashmore, Melvin Kranzberg, Robert Hutchins, and Sir Robert Watson-Watt.

Broadcast December 10 to December 23» 1962 SOUTH AFRICA'S RACIAL PROBLEMS; Harvey Wheeler, co-author of "Fail-Safe," in a discussion with Edgar Hill, a South African newspaper's assistant editor. Wheeler suggests that South Africa is the microcosm of the world's race relations for the next fifty years. A CONVERSATION WITH LORD RUSSELL; Which ranges over philosophy, Marxism, nuclear armament, Hiroshima, the cold war, and collective security. MAN IS NOT A THING; A nine-series program featuring Dr. Erich Fromm on the work of Sigmund Freud. Each of the interviews is followed by a panel discussion including theologians and psychiatrists. JUSTICE BYRON WHITE—AMERICAN ATTITUDES TOWARD THE BAR: The newest U.S. Supreme Court Justice speaking to the American Bar Association's 85th Convention. WHAT THE CHURCHES CAN DO FOR PEACE; Reverend Rodney Shaw is director of the Methodist "Race for Peace." Here he outlines a program for action. 333 Broadcast December 24» 1962 to January 6, 1963 LATIN AMERICA—THE CRISIS POLICY; Sidney Lens, Terence McCarthy, Roy Bennet, and John McDermott are criti cal of the present U.S. policy toward Latin America. GOVERNMENT INFORMATION AND EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE; Con gressman John Moss of California, whose special interest is the freeing of information, in a talk to the American Bar Association. CAN LABOR JOIN THE PEACE MOVEMENT? First, a talk by Mike Harrington, editor of NEW AMERICA, who thinks the answer is, "No," followed by Stan Aronowitz, of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers, who believes the peace movement will have to join labor instead. ALLEN DULLES OF THE CIA; The former director of the Central Intelligence Agency talks about the Soviet Union, Communism, the cold war and the importance of an intelligence system to the United States. WILLIAM 0. DOUGLAS—THE SICKNESS OF AMERICA; Supreme Court Justice Douglas diagnoses the American illness of racial segregation, conformity, insecurity, domination by the military, and decline of debate. GENE DEBBS OF TERRE HAUTE; A sketch of the man who or ganized the first industrial union in the United States and ran for President from Atlanta Federal Prison. THE SEA CHASE OF THE "EVERYMAN"; A Pacifica documentary on the events surrounding the- boat that the Com mittee for Nonviolent Action intended to send into the U.S. nuclear test site at Christmas Island to protest nuclear testing. APPENDIX C PROGRAM SCHEDULE, KPFA, March 2-8, 1969

The Sexton, Lunigrove, Domsik MOVEMENT WITH PEOPLE Premsyl Koci DANCER'S WORKSHOP Malinka, Etherea, Kunka Libuse Domaninska 321 DIVISADERO Wuerfi, Wonderglitter, Town Councillor. SAN FRANCISCO Karel Berman tues. night lesson8:30 Apprentice Waiter, Child Prodigy, thur. night ritual 8:30 Student.. .Helena Tattermuschova for couples - wed. night two's 8:30 Kedruta Jaroslava Dobra for info, call MA 6-0414 Harper, Vojta, Composer, Voice Antonin Votava Cloudy, Vacek, Another Voice Hanus Thein Rainbowglory, Miroslav, Poet DYNA DUAL Milan Karpisek Another Poet, second Taborite AUDIO CLINIC Jan Hlavsa • HI-FI STEREO SALES 1st Taborite Jaroslav Veverka AND SERVICE Apparition of the Poet. .. Beno Blachut • AUDIO CONSULTATION Vaclav Neumann, Prague Smetana 2985 COLLEGE AVE. SUNDAY 2 Theater Chorus, Prague National 549-0206 BERKELEY, CALIF. 94705 Theater Orchestra Supraphon SV 8074/6 Presented by John Rockwell [the savoy-tivoli 8:00 CONCERT Berlioz: Oierture to "Beatrice and 6:30 KPFA NEWS (March 3) 7 Upper Grant Avenue, San Francisco Benedict" 7:00 COMMENTARY by Lewis F. Sher | Paella • Lasagna Boult, Promenade Orchestra man, Berkeley attorney and Republi 5 Grandma Stein's stewed chicken Westminster XWN 18S24 (8) can State Senator from the 8th dis i Choice Liquors • Sangria * steam beer Mozart: String Quintet in C, K 515 trict. (March 3) ; Dinner 6-11 p.m. Graf, viola; Heutlin'g Quartet 7:15 SWEDISH PRESS REVIEW (March 1 Around the corner from Seraphim SIC6028 (36) ; Iht ©Id factors &>&' Liszt: Annees de Pelerlnage — 3) "First Year, Switzerland" 7:30 LISTENING BACK: Recordings Farnadi, piano dating to 1914 including the voices of Westminster WM-1023 (39) Princess Watahase, Jerry Colono, Haydn: The Seven Lest Words of Billy Murry, W.C. Handy, Irving Kauf UNITY PRESS Christ man, Collins and Harlan, and Nelson Jones, Little Symphony Eddie. (WBAI) a non-profit press, Nonesuch H-1154 (57) 8:00 PROKOFIEV PERFORMING PRO to insure 10:30 KPFA NEWS (March 1) KOFIEV: Lawrence Jackson presents perforriianceiT of Prokofiev's Piano the continuation of 10:45 COMMENTARY by Tom Hayden. Concerto no. 3 in C in which the com (March 1,6:45 pm) poser appears as soloist with the operations, offers the following London Symphony Orchestra under 11:00 JAZZ REVIEW with Philip El- Piero Coppola, and the Romeo and two books for sale: wood. Juliet Suite no. 2 in which the com poser conducts the Moscow Phil 1:00 OPEN HOUR for timely public harmonic. The Poetry of Jack Rainsberger, affairs coverage. 9:00 THE SIGNS OF OUR TIME — I: A Death Row Nevada State Prison, 2:00 REPORT TO THE LISTENER with New Approach to God. L.J. Cardinal station manager Alfred Partridge. (Feb Suenens, Archbishop of Malines- Carson City, Nevada $1.00 28) Brussels and one of the central figures of the Vatican Council, delivers the 2:15 UP AGAINST THE IVY WALL: A first of his three Earl Lectures on Feb Lovebeast & other incarnations discussion of the book of the above ruary 20,1968. Cardinal Suenens is the title which deals with the uprising at first Roman Catholic theologian in the Wsrdvision by Stephen Levine Columbia University in the spring of 68-year history of the famed Earl Lec 1968. Gershon Friedlin talks with the tures to be one of the featured speak Linevision by Felipe Ehrenberg book's principal author Jerry Avorn, ers. The series is sponsored annually its contributing author Andrew Crane, by the Pacific School of Religion, and $1.50 and Anne Hoffman who is described in 1968 was held at the First Presby in the book. (WBAI) terian Church in Berkeley. The second UNITY program in this series will be aired on PRESS, 2:45 JANACEK: The Excursions of Mr. March 15. 219A 3rd Street, Sausalito Broucek TEL: 332-5117 Mr. Broucek Bohumir Vich 10:00 LIVE FROM THE AVALON BALL Mazal, Azurean, Peter. . . Ivo Zidek ROOM: 3^4 385

BEGIN MONDAY 3 FREEWAY sts®l

7:00 KPFA NEWS (March 2) 148 ("Notturno") 6:30 KPFA NEWS (March 4) Beaux Arts Trio 7:00 COMMENTARY by William Win 7:30 IN THE MORNING wi!h John Philips World Series PHC 2-003 ter, political analyst. (KPFK) (March 4) FitzGihbon and Herb Kohl. (13) Brecht-Weill: The Three-Penny Opera 7:15 SOVIET PRESS AND PERIODI 8:30 CONCERT (Musical score) CALS with William Mandel, authority Gade: Symphony no. 1 in c, op. 5 Adler, soloists, chorus and or on the USSR and author of the book Hye-Knudsen, Royal Danish chestra of the Vienna State Opera Russia Re-Examined. (March 4) Orchestra Vanguard SRV-273SD (58) Turnabout TV 34052S (36) 7:30 WHERE IT'S AT in the arts. Ligeti: Lux Aeterna 1:45 FEINSTEIN IN VENICE — JEAN Franz, North German Radio Choir, RENOIR (March 1, 8:45 pm) 8:15 OPEN HOUR for timely public Hamburg affairs coverage. DGG 137 004 (9) 2:45 A 14-YEAR OLD BLACK PAN Liszt: Annees de Peterinage — THER: A question and answer session 9:15 OF UNICORNS AND UNIVERSES: "Second Year, Italy" recorded in the 7th grade classroom Fantasy and science fiction reviews Farnadi, piano of Armand Kerin, Jr., a teacher in Daly with Baird Searles. (WBAI) Westminster WM-1023 (41) City. The students question Stanley Kopelent: Matka Hagwood, a 9th grader at West Cam 9:30 MUSIC FROM THE UNIVERSITY Franz, North German Radio Choir pus in Berkeley and a member of the OF CALIFORNIA: Ralph Kirkpatrick, (11) Black Panther Party. Racism, police harpsichord. Recorded at Hertz Hall on Berlioz: Le Mort d'Orfee brutality and the San Francisco State January 12,1969. Soames, tenor; Bernard, Royal College situation are among the prob Philharmonic (15) lems discussed. Recorded on Decem Purcell: Toccata ber 6, 1968, at Ben Franklin School. Handel: Suite in t 10:30 COMMENTARY by Lewis F. Rameau: Pieces de Clavecin Sherman. (March 2, 7 pm) 4:00 BALLOONCECILE Couperin: Onzieme Ordre Bach: Concerto nach Itaiienischem 10:45 SWEDISH PRESS REVIEW 4:45 CONCERT Gusto (March 2) Bonporti: Concerto a quattro in F, Scarlatti: Seven Sonatas op. 11, no. 6 11:00 CURRENT CINEMA with Claire I Musici 11:00 WERE THE APOSTLES COM Clouzot. (Feb 28) Epic LC 3542 (11) MUNISTS — A SOCRATIC DIALOGUE: Stravinsky: Agon Milton Mayer, writer, lecturer and pro 11:30 FROM THE MIDWAY: Milton Stravinsky, L.A. Festival Symphony fessor of English at the University of Friedman, professor of economics Columbia ML 5215 (24) Massachusetts, leads a discussion pro at the University of Chicago, discusses Mozart: Clarinet Quintet gram in the Five College Forum series, the similarities between forced mili de Bavier, clarinet: New Italian produced and originally broadcast by tary conscription and federal aid to Quartet WFCR in Amherst, Massachusetts. education. One of a series from the London LL 573(35) Participating are four undergraduate University of Chicago, titled "Self In students, one each from Amherst, Mt. terest, The Draft, and Higher Educa 6:00 FRENCH NEWS ANALYSIS: Pre Holyoke, and Smith Colleges, and the tion." (U. of Chicago) pared and read in the French language by Pierre Idiart, editor of the weekly University of Massachusetts (March 6) 12:30 CONCERT newspaper Le CalHornien. 12:00 TIEDWINDLE with Donald An Schubert: Piano Trio in E flat, op. thony. 386

3:00 CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WARFARE: Professor Sydney D. Rubbe, chairman of ihe department of micro biology at the University of Melbourne, Australia, in a strong indictment of American defoliation and chemical TUESDAY 4 warfare practices in Vietnam. Profes PEDESTRIANS sor Rubbe's speech was given before a meeting of the War and Peace Study Group of Australia. PROHIBITED ("NO"! 3:45 CHILDREN'S BOOK SAMPLER with Ellyn Beaty. (March 8) [TURNS | EMERGENCY PARKING 4:00 BALLOONELLEN j ONLY 4:45 CONCERT OF NEW RELEASES 7:00 KPFA NEWS (March 3) 6:00 GERMAN PRESS REVIEW with Harold Reynolds, graduate student in 7:30 THE TUESDAY MORNING CLUB German at the University of California with Julian White. in Berkeley. (March 5) 8:30 CONCERT 6:30 KPFA NEWS (March 5) Berlioz: Overture to "Benevenuto Prokofiev: Concerto in D for violin Cellini" and orchestra 7:00 KPFA LIFE-LINE: Your Host for Cernstein, N.Y. Philharmonic Szigeti, violin; Beecham, tonight's program is Erik Bauersfeld. Columbia ML 5623 (11) London Philharmonic (20) In addition to our regular features Mozart: Symphony no.29 in A, K.201 which include the Commentary of Sid Davis, Sinfonia of London 2:30 PAUL ZIMMER READS HIS ney Roger, Science Report with J. ' ;CA VICS-1378 (23) POEMS: Paul Zimmer's first book of Dennis Lawrence, and another install Vivaldi: The Four Seasons poems The Ribs of Death was recently ment of his autobiography by Kenneth Barchet, violin; Tilegant, S.W. published by October House, His quir Rexroth, there will be guests, and as German Chamber Orchestra ky mythic poems are written with sure sortments from the art and entertain Nonesuch H-1070 (42) control and craftsmanship and the ment worlds. After midnight, Live Liszt: Annees de Pelerinage — poet reads with genuine cool. Martin Music, of course. "Third Year, Italy" Last introduces the poet. (WBAI) Farnadi, piano Westminster WM-1023 (39)

10:30 COMMENTARY by William Win ter. (March 3, 7 pm)

10:45 SOVIET PRESS AND PERIODI CALS (March 3, 7:15 pm)

11:00 MORNING READING

11:30 THE DEEP SEAS: The Ocean as Common Heritage. In these excerpts from the Conference on Ocean Space at the Center for the Study of Demo cratic Institutions, an international group of participants accept the prin ciple of the common heritage of the ocean to all nations, but do not agree on factors of technology, politics and self-interest. (CSDI)

12:30 MEDICAL RADIO CONFERENCE: Two doctors discuss "Management Problems of Osteomyelitis" in a live broadcast from the UC Medical Center in San Francisco and/or the University of Washington Medical Center in Se attle.

1:30 CONCERT Schoenberg: Serenade, op. 24 Maderna, Melos Ensemble of Lon don L'Oiseau-lyre OL 250 (38) 3 37

SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT

WED

Brahms: Sextetin B fjat, op.18 5 Menuhin, Masters, violins; Arono- witz, Wallfisch, violas; Gendron, Simpson, celli. Angel 3623 4 (37)

iCJSi-a..-/ 6:00 REVIEW OF THE BRITISH WEEK LIES (BBC)

12:10 U.C. NOON CONCERT: -Mezzo 6:30 KPFA NEWS (March 6) soprano Carolyn Carlat. and pianist 7:00 COMMENTARY by Father Eugene Gil Rubin perform songs by Schubert Boyle. (March 6) and Brahms in a live broadcast from Hertz Hall tin the Berkeley campus. 7:15 THE MUSE OF PARKER STREET: Malvina Reynolds with footnotes on the 7:0C KPFA NEWS (March 4) 1:00 NON-AUTHORITARIAN TEACH news. (March 6) ING — INNOVATIONS IN THE CLASS 7:30 IN THE MORNING with Jack ROOM—I (March 1, 9:45 pnrt) 7:30 MIDWEEK JAZZ with Philip El- Harms. wood. 2:00 IMAGO: Poetry and a fable by 8:30 CONCERT Ellen Jaffe, a young New Yorker who 8:15 OPEN HOUR for timely public Mozart: String Quintet in c, K. 406 has worked at WBAI. (WBAI) affairs coverage. Graf, viola; Heutling Quartet Seraphim SIC-6028 (24) 2:45 MUSIC FROM GERMANY: The 9:15 THE IMAGERY OF VISION IN Berlioz: Romeo and Juliet Berlin Radio Symphony Orchestra per THE NOVELS OF JAMES JOYCE — I: Swarthout, mezzo-soprano; Garris, forms the Piano Concerto No. 5 in c The expansion of consciousness tenor; Mascana, bass; Toscanini, Minor by the early 19th century Ger through the medium of art is the lead Chorus, NBC Symphony 1947 man composer Jean Baptist Cramer. ing theme of this seminar. A Portrait of broadcast (93) the Artist as a Young Man, Ulysses, 3:15 LSD — A DIALOGUE AND A DIA and Finnegan's Wake are represented 10:30 COMMENTARY by Sidney Roger, TRIBES dramatization of an imaginary as stages in a modern Dantean adven Bay Area journalist specializing in debate between Peter, a very gifted ture, equivalent respectively to La Vita labor affairs. (March 4) young man, and the author, a middle- Nuova, Inferno, and Purgaturio. aged mathematics professor. The de Joyce's theory of art as a vehicle of 10:45 GERMAN PR.ESS REVIEW bate provides a format for an intense illumination, his syncretization of (March 4, 6 pm) discussion of the values and dangers of dream, theology and myth, the relation LSD use. Written and adapted for radio ship of his insights to those of Freud 11:00 MORNING READING by Miriam L. Yevick, associate pro and Jyng, and to Oriental thought are fessor of mathematics at Rutgers Uni discussed in detail and in depth. The 11:30: PRESS CONFERENCE OF versity, who reads the part of the pro second program in this series will be "FORMAL COMPLAINT" BY WOMEN fessor. broadcast on March 13. (March 6) STUDENTS HOSED-DOWN IN S.F. JAIL: A press conference recorded 4:00 BALLOONSHARON or Kidthings. 10:30 MOLLY MIX: Molly's solliloquy Monday, January 27, in City Hall. The from James Joyce's Ulysses—expand participants are approximately fifty 4:45 CONCERT ed, echoed, foreshadowed and inter women arrested on January 23 at S.F. Bach: Suite no. 1 in G for unaccom woven into the tapestry of this senu- State College, who complain about panied cello ous and dream-like hour and forty- their treatment in jail following those Casals, cello eight minutes. Sibon McKenna is the arrests. They then go to the Mayor's Angel COLH16(16) reader. Heard originally on "The Wal office to lodge a formal complaint. Berg: Piano Sonata, op, 1 lace Berry Show" in January, 1969. Recorded by KPFA volunteer David Gould, piano Lawsky. Columbia ML 5336 (13) 12:15 THE WALLACE BERRY SHOW / ENDX FREEWAY 'LAN E V/2 Ml/ ENDS THURSDAY & MERGE vLEFT>

7:00 KPFA NEWS (March 5) 2:45 THE A.F.T. AT SAN FRANCISCO anniversary of his death. STATE: Ralph Anspach and Erwin 7:30 IN THE MORNING with Jack Kelley, both associate professors of 8:15 THE PRESS WATCHERS with Harms. economics at S.F. State College, dis cuss the basic issues behind the strike Spencer Klaw, Joseph Lyford and Pete Steffens. 8:30 CONCERT with Elsa Knight Thompson. Dr. An Bruckner: Mass in e spach is a member of the Academic. 8:45 ERIC MENDELSOHN — VISIONS Thurn, Hamburg State Opera Senate, and Dr. Kelley is a labor eco AND REVISIONS: Bruce Radde and Choir and Orchestra nomist. Recorded January 14,1969. Susan King talk with Mrs. Eric Men Capitol P 8004 (42) delsohn, widow of the distinguished Debussy: La Oamoiselle Elue 4:00 BALLOONBETTY German architect. They discuss Men Sayo, soprano; Nadell, contralto, Ormandy, Philadelphia Orchestra 4:45 CONCERT delsohn's work in America and Europe, and the political situation that led to Columbia ML 4075 (20) Monteverdi: Hor one'I del; Lasciate his departure from Germany in the Berlioz: La Captive, op. 12 mi morire; Zeliro Torna 1930's. The program is heard in con Steber, soprano; Morel, Columbia Boulanger, ensemble junction with a major retrospective of Symphony Angel COLH 20 (15) the architect's drawings at the Univer Columbia M1 4090 (8) Stockhausen: Gruppen for three of California Art Museum during Beethoven: Archduke Trio orchestras sity March and April. (March 7) Suk Trio Stockhausen. Maderna, Gielen, Crossroads 22 16 0021 (37) Cologne Radio Orchestra DGG 137 002 (24) 9:45 DIETRICH FISCHER-DIESKAU: The celebrated baritone talks with 10:30 COMMENTARY by Father Eu Schoenberg: Violin Concerto WBAI's music director Eric Salzman gene Boyle. (March 5) Krasner, violin; Mitopoulos, N.Y. Philharmonic about art, life, love and lieder and we hear some Mozart, Mahler and a couple 10:45 THE MUSE OF PARKER STREET Columbia ML 4857 (31) of other things from his more than 200 (March 5, 7:15 pm) recordings. (WBAI) 11:00 MORNING READING 6:00 CALENDAR OF EVENTS with Joe Agos. (March 7) 11:15 A BLACK ARTIST SPEAKS: 11:30 WERE THE APOSTLES COM Charles White, noted black American MUNISTS — A SOCRATIC DIALOGUE 6:30 KPFA NEWS (March 7) artist, speaking at Merritt College in (March 3,11 pm) Oakland on October 6, 1968. He was 7:00 COMMENTARY by Hal Draper of presented by the Community Services 12:30 CONCERT the Independent Socialist Club and an Program of Merritt College which of Morawetz: Fantaisie editor of New Politics arid/or Anne fers films, lectures and guest artists Gould, piano Draper of the Amalgamated Clothing to the public at no charge. Some of CBC Transcription (15) Workers staff and secretary of Citi Mr. White's work is owned by the Ber Tchaikovsky: Quartet no, 3 in e flat, zens for Farm Labor. (March 7) lin Museum and the Dresden Museum op. 30 and he has-received awards from the Quartet of the Leningrad Phil 7:15 COMMENTARY by David N. Bor- National Institute of Arts and Letters, harmonic Society tin, Bay Area attorney, who discusses the International Show of Germany, Ministry of Culture of the USSR "law and order." (March 7) the American Academy of Arts and D-01464/65 (42) the Metropolitan Museum of Art. 7:30 BERLIOZ MEMOIRS — I: The (March 7) 1:30 THE IMAGERY OF VISION IN first of three programs drawn from the THE NOVELS OF JAMES JOYCE — I memoirs of the great French composer 12:00 THE JURA-PARIS ROAD with (March 5, 9:15 pm) Hector Berlioz, offered on the 100th Charles Shere. 339

FREEWAY

AHEAD DIVIDED FRIDAY 7 ROAD

7:00 KPFA NEWS (March 6) bas and harpsichord. 4:00 BALLOONBEECHER

7:30 IN THE MORNING with Bob Kauf- 2:30 A BLACK ARTIST SPEAKS (March 4:45 CONCERT OF NEW RELEASES mann. 6,11:15 pm) 6:00 JAPANESE PRESS REVIEW with 8:30 CONCERT Richard Lock, former resident and Mozart: Symphony no. 41 in C, K. teacher in Japan. (March 8) 551 Jochum, Concertgebouw Orches 6:30 KPFA NEWS (March 8) tra Philips PHS 900-186 (34) 7:00 COMMENTARY by Robert Pickus, Oliveros: I ov IV president of the World Without War Odyssey 32 16 0160 (20) Council of Northern California and Bach: Suite no. 2 in b senior associate of the Center for van Beinum, Concertgebouw Or War/Peace Studies. (March 8) chestra Epic SC 6021 (21) 7:15 REPORT TO THE LISTENER by Berlioz: Grande Symphonie Funebre station manager Alfred Partridge. et Triomphale (March 9) Dondeyne, Paris Chorus and Or chestra 7:30 WHERE IT'S AT in the arts. Westminster 18865 (38) 8:15 OPEN HOUR for timely public 10:30 COMMENTARY by Hal and/or affairs coverage. Anne Draper. (March 6, 7 pm) 9:15 CAPITOL NEWS SUMMARY direct 10:45 COMMENTARY by David N. from Pacifica's Washington bureau. Bortin. (March 6, 7:15 pm) o 9:45 WALTER AND MAHLER'S NINTH: 11:00 MORNING READING Bruno Walter joined Mahler in Vienna as a young conductor and became one 11:30 CALENDAR OF EVENTS. (March of his foremost interpreters. On this 6, 6pm) program he is heard first rehearsing,' then performing Mahler's Ninth Sym 12:00 CONCERT phony. This was one of Walter's final Beethoven: String Quartet no. 75 in a, sessions with the Columbia Symphony op. 132 before his death in 1962. (Columbia Quartetto Italiano M2L 276) Philips PHS )00; 182 (47) 3:15 CONVERSATIONS AT CHICAGO: Ichiyanagit Pratyahara Emphysema. An examination of this 11:30 GENETIC FAUX PAS: A story Ensemble of the 5th Contemporary major lung disease and a discussion of read and written by Harvey L. Bilker Music Festival of Koyto the relationship of smoking to dis which first appeared in The Realist. NHK transcription (21) eases of the lungs by Dr, Eugene It concerns world reaction to a rather Robin, professor of medicine at the special event — two infants are born 1:15 ERIC MENDELSOHN — VISIONS University of Pittsburgh; Dr. Edward with no sexual organs whatsoever. AND REVISIONS (March 6, 8:45 pm) H. Bergotsky, associate professor of (WBAI) physiology and rehabilitation medicine at New York University; and Dr. Alfred 12:00 THE SURPLUS PROPHETS: Fishman, moderator and professor of Steve Weissmann, Todd Gitlin, James 2:15 BARTHOLOMEE: La Tombeau de medicine at the University of Chicago. O'Connor, Terry Cannon, Martin Nico- Marin Marais for violin, 2 viola da gam- (U. of Chicago) laus and guests. 390

The Wooden Indian 207 Capitrila Ave., Capitola, Calif.

Handmade, sculptured objects in doorshapes, chests, boxes, etc.

Mostly made by

Doormaker to the Marathon

Imported coffees Roasted in our own store Special Blended Teas Herbs and Spices TURNOUT Whole and Ground Mail Orders Promptly Filled. 1 block above Shattuck 1/4 MILE 2124 Vine Street Berkeley, Calif. Tel. 841-0564

8:00 THE SHARONSHOW

complete contact lens service 9:00 KPFA NEWS (March 7) Glaucoma check up — general vision cars PHIUP SCHLETTER, O.D. 9:30 BERLIOZ: Requiem. Simoneau, 3031 Telegraph Ave. Suite 230 tenor; Munch, New England Conser M«mb«r Berkeley/By Appointment Only A.O.A. —C.O.A vatory Chorus, Boston Symphony. Berk. Central Medical Bids- 849-2202 RCA 6077. Presented on the 100th Anniversary ol the composer's death.

11:00 COMMENTARY by Robert Pickus. (March 7, 7 pm)

ONE OF THE LARGEST SELECTIONS IN j 11:15 JAPANESE PRESS REVIEW THE EAST BAY OF USED VOLKSWAGENS (March 7, 6 pm)

• SEDANS • BUSES • CONVERTIBLES • GHIAS • TRUCKS 11:30 BOOKS with Kenneth Rexroth. CoYnplott Repair Service Bonk Financing BOUGHT-SOLD-SERVICED 12:00 CHILDREN'S BOOK SAMPLER 841-5755 (March 4, 3:45 pm) 1830 SAN PABLO AVE. BERKELEY i 12:30 REMINISCENCES OF A REBEL: Ben Legere continues his radio auto biography.

1:00 A CONCERT FROM RADIO NED- ERLAND: Paul Hupperts conducts the Utrecht Symphony Orchestra and solo ist Phia Berghout in Henk Badings' Concerto lor Harp and Orchestra and LE ram VILLA® Beethoven's Symphony no. 4 in B flat. 2:00 PHYSICIANS DISCUSS TRANS PLANTATION OF THE HEART AND Handily Style FkijcI} Dinners OTHER ORGANS: The second ot our four-program series on organ trans plantation. recorded at the UC Medical OPEM NfOHTW: Center in San Francisco on November 15, 1968. This session includes talks on developments and problems involved 3I0S Sttaiiuci grentie. Beneiejj-Tei.649-ii?3 in organ transplantation. The modera L tor is Elmer Laursen. 391

The Upstart Crow and Company

open every day 10 am~11 pm Sunday 10 am - 7 pm SATURDAY 8 wsgsmmtm at THE CANNERY WsmXhSi Books 2801 Leavenworth :tt i>, San Francisco 474-0212

3:45 ORATORIO AND FILM MUSIC BY SHOSTAKOVICH: In response to num erous listener requests, Lawrence Jackson presents the Song' of the Forests performed by Soloists, Chorus and Orchestra of the USSR State Sym phony under Evgeny Mravinsky, and the Fall of Berlin performed by the Moscow Radio Chorus and Orchestra under Aleksandr Gauk.

4:45 EXPANDED POETRY: Anti-war and black power poetry are discussed in this session recorded at the New School for Social Research on October 10, 1968. Participants are Clarence Major, Robert Blye, Walter Lowenfels and moderator Ronald Gross. (WBAI)

6:30 KPFA NEWS (March 9)

6:45 COMMENTARY by Peter Shapiro, San Francisco State College student KPFA SUBSCRIPTION FORM and managing editor of Open Process. (March 9)

7:00 MANY DIFFERENT THINGS with Herbert Kohl, John FitzGibbon and a variety of friends.

8:00 BERLIOZ: Beatrice et Benedict. Colin Davis conducts soloists Jose NAME phine Veasey, mezzo-soprano; John Mitchinson, tenor; and the London Symphony Orchestra and Chorus on this L'Oiseau-Lyre recording SOL 256/ ADDRESS 7. Presented in honor of the 100th anniversary of Berlioz' death.

9:30 NON-AUTHORITARIAN TEACH CITY ZIP ING — INNOVATIONS IN THE CLASS ROOM — It: A discussion led by Paul Goodman, recorded at the UC Exten PLEASE ENTER A SUBSCRIPTION TO KPFA AS FOLLOWS: sion workshop on education held on the Berkeley campus November 22-24, 1968 (March 12) • $25 FAMILY • $10 STUDENT • $15 REGULAR • $10 RETIRED 10:45 MUSIC IN AMERICA with Chris Strachwitz. KPFA, 2207 SHATTUCK AVENUE, BERKELEY 94704 12:00 ALL-NIGHT JAZZ with Dan Mc- Closky. APPENDIX D

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE AND COVERING LETTER

SACRAMENTO STATE COLLEGE

6000 JAY STREET • SACRAMENTO • CALIFORNIA 958 1 9 June 18, 1969

Dear Friend I am conducting research concerning the relationship of political attitudes and use of mass media. Fran a random sample of Bay Area groups, your name has been selected. I would appreciate your ccmpleting the enclosed questionnaire for this study. You need not sign your name, but please answer every question as completely as you are able. I assure you that your completed questionnaire will be completely confidential, and only the compiled results of the total groups will be used in any conclusions. No commercial use will be made of this material. A self-stamped envelope is enclosed for your use in returning the completed questionnaire. My thanks for your assistance in this research project. Sincerely,

Gene R. Stebbins Department of Speech Enclosure

392 SURVEY OF POLITICAL. ATTITUDES AND USE CF MASS MEDIA

1. Did you vote In the last presidential election? Te« Ko If so, for which candidate did you vote? Cleaver Humphrey Nixon Wallace

2. What is your opinion of how well Riohard Nixon is doing as President? Excellent Above Average __Average Below Average Poor

3. What is your opinion of how well Ronald Reagan is doing as Governor? Excellent Above Average Average Below Average Poor

It, Where do you usually get most of your news about what is going on in the world? Newspapers Radio Television Magazines People'

5. If you think a BETTER job of reporting newa is done by any particular newspaper, name that newspaper! _____ 6. If you think a BETTER Job of reporting news is done by any particular television station, name that television station: _ _ _ _

7 c If you think a BEIT EH Job of reporting news is done by any particular • radio station, name that radio station: _

8. If you think a BETTER Job of public affairs programming (discussions and analysis of current problems) is done by any particular television station, name that television station: ______• 9. If you think a BETTER job of public affairs programing is done by any particular radio station, name that radio station: ______

10. If there is a television station whose TOTAL programming is outstanding, in your opinion, name that television station: ______

11. If there is a radio station whose TOTAL programing la outstanding. In your opinion, name that radio station: ______

TJ • The following are statements that are often heard. *r £ g *f P Indicate how XOU feel about each statement by olrellng g> S „ •g K j? & one of the choices at the right. g jjj, E " J c IS ti *1 S a n 12. Labor unions are a good thing for the country. SA A U D SD

13. There Isn't nuch the average citicen oan do to influence the government. SA A U D SD

K». Host businesses In thia oountry make too much profit. SA A U D SD

1$. The government should not build and operate large electric power dans. SA A U D SD 16. It really io not w>r important whether or not * person votes In an eleotion. OA A U D 80

393 PK* 2

17. The government sliould eee to it tlmt everyone has a .chance to work SA A U D 3D

1?. If a person wants good government, ha eliould make contributions to the campaigns of those candidates he respects. SA A U D SD

19. The government should not get Involved in providing radical care to people. SA A U D SD

20. The average person has a good opportunity to Influence the outcome of an eleotlon by working to elect hie candidate. SA A U D SD

21. The government should soo to it that every Intelligent young person has a chance to get a college education. SA A U D 3D

22. Writing to your legislator doesn't often Influence the way he votes. SA A U D SD

23. Rich people should not have to pay Income taxes at higher rates than other people. SX A U D SD

2U. The government should see to it that regardless of a person's race or creed, he has a decent place to live. SA A a D SD

2$. A person should discuss his feelings about political matters with hia friends and associates. SA, A U D 3D

26. The government should protect every person's right to express his beliefs, no matter how unpopular they are. SA A U tb SD

27. Private enterprise is almost always more effioisit than the government. SA A U D SD

Finally, would you give some information about yourself?

28. lour age? ___ Married? Yes Ho

29. What is the highest level of education you completed? some high school eocis college graduate high school graduate collage <__jjraduate study 30. into what croup would you place your TOTAL fAiHHC lnCoae? ___below v5,000 05.000 to 8,000 £8.000 to 12,000 312.000 to 18,000 __ over $18,000

Thank you tor assisting lis this research projeot.

Betvm toi Gene R, Stebblne Department of Speech ' Sacranoito State Collage Sacraamto, California 95819

394 SOURCES CONSULTED

A. BOOKS Adorno, T. ¥. et al. The Authoritarian Personality. New York; Harper and Brothers, 1950. Archer^ Gleason L. Big Business and Radio. New York: American Historical Company, 1939. , History of Radio to 1926. New York; American Historical Company, 1933* Atkinson, Carroll. American Universities and Colleges that Have Held Broadcast Licenses. Boston; Meador Publishing Company, 1941. Broadcasting Yearbook, 196$. Washington; Broadcasting Magazine, 1969. Campbell, Angus, et al. The American Voter. New York; Wiley, 196(71 Centers, Richard. The Psychology of Social Classes. Princeton; Princeton Press, 1949. Dallas, Paul. Dallas in Wonderland. Los Angeles: published by author, 1967. Digest of the Kingdom of the Netherlands: Education, Arts and Sciences. Amsterdam: The Netherlands Govern ment Information Service, 1965. Ferguson, L.W. Personality Measurement. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1952. Frost, S. E., Jr., Education's Own Stations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1937- Head, Sydney. Broadcasting in America. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1956.

395 396 Kirscht, John P., and Dillehay, Ronald C. Dimensions of Authoritarianism. Lexington; University of Kentucky Press, 1967. McKinney, Eleanor, ed. The Exacting Ear. New York; Pantheon, 1966. Minow, Newton. Equal Time. New York; Atheneurn, 1964. Nelson, Lyle M. "The Financing of Educational Television." Educational Television, the Next Ten Years. Edited by Wilbur Schramm. Stanford; Institute for Communications Research, 1962. Paulu, Burton. Radio and Television Broadcasting on the European Continent. Minneapolis; The University of Minnesota Press, 1967. Powell, John W. Channels of Learning. Washington; Public Affairs Press, 1962. Roper, Burns W. Emerging Profiles of Television and Other Mass Media; Public Attitudes 1959-1967. New York; Television Information Office, 1967. Summers, Harrison B. Radio Programs Carried on National Networks. Columbus, Ohio; Ohio State Univer sity, undated.

B. .ARTICLES IN PERIODICALS Adkins, Gale R. Review of McKinney, The Exacting Ear, QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF SPEECH, LIII, No. 2 (1967) p. 193. "Berkeley's BBC," THE ECONOMIST, April 26, 1958. Berkeley Gazette, April 14, 1949? p. 10. BROADCASTING, February 1, 1935, p. 35? Octobfcr 15, 1938, p. 22j April 7, 1958, p. 32; December 20, 1965, p. 275 July 14, 1969, p. 64. BROADCASTING. Editorial. February 10, 1969, p. 88., Friends of Free Radio. Advertiser.ient in SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE, January 9, 1963, p. 40. Gould, Jack. NEW YORK TIMES, July 10, I960, Sec. 2, p. 15. 397 , NEW YORK TIMES, July 16, 1962, p. 47. , NEW YORK TIMES, August 3, 1963, Sec. 2, p. 12. Greb, Gordon B. "Golden Anniversary of Broadcasting," JOURNAL OF BROADCASTING, III, No. 1 (Winter 1958-59), PP. 3-13. Hagan, R. H. "There is Something New In and On the Air in Berkeley," THIS WORLD, July 10, 1949, p. 22. Sunday supplement tothe SUNDAY SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE. "Intellectual's Radio," NEW YORKER, December 19, 1959, pp. 25-26. "Listeners Subscribe," THE COMMONWEAL, January 22, 1969* p. 458. "Look Who's Talking," FORTUNE, August, 1967, p. 179. McClosky, Herbert. "Conservatism and Personality," AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW, LII (March 1958), pp. 479-93. Moore, Eleanor McICinney. Letter to the Editor, SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE, May 13, 1954, p. 18. NATION, February 3, 1964, pp. 110-11; November 30, 1963» pp. 360-62. NEW REPUBLIC, February 16, 1963, pp. 4-5? November 2, 1963, p. 36; February 8, 1964, p. 5. NEW YORK TIMES, Editorials. November 15, 1963, p. 34; January 24, 1964, p. 26. NEWSWEEK, January 25, I960, p. 61; November 25, 1963? p. 80j February 3, 1964, p. 75. "Radio's 'Egghead' Organization," CORONET, January 1961, pp. 44-48. "Reserve Bank for Big Ideas, Little Ideas, and Oddball Ideas," LIFE, June 9, 1967> p. 64. Rexroth, Kenneth. "An Oath for KPFA," SAN FRANCISCO EXAMINER, November 13, 1963, p. 37. ST. LOUIS POST DISPATCH. Editorial, January 13, 19631 January 28, 1964. 398 SAN FRANCISCO CALL-BULLETIN, April 24, 195^, p. 1. SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE, June 17, 1949; April 26, 1954; July 28, 1963.

SAN FRANCISCO EXAMINER, July 28, 1963; April 20, I960; Editorial, April 16, I960. Shayon, Robert Lewis, "A & P," SATURDAY REVIEW, December 26, 1959, p. 26. , "Drums Along the Pacific," SATURDAY REVIEW, May 30, 1959, p« 28. , "Intellectual Pony Express," SATURDAY REVI.SW, August 20, I960, p. 34. , "The Real Stokley Carmichael," SATURDAY REVIEW, July 9, 1966, p. 42. Smith, R. Franklin. "Oldest Station in the Nation?" JOURNAL OF BROADCASTING, IV, No. 1 (Winter 1959-60), pp. 40.55. Taper, Bernard, "A Radio Experiment Signs Off," THIS WORLD, August 13, 1950, p. 19, Sunday supplement to SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE. TELEVISION MAGAZINE, XXII, No. 7 (July 1965), p. 87. TIME, May 28, 1951, p. 63; February 24, 1958, p. 63; January 25, I960, p. 58m, January 31, 1964, p. 56; April 25, 1969, p. 90. WASHINGTON POST. Editorial, November 30, 1963, p. A12. Winkler, Harold. "Pacifica Radio—Room for Dissent," NAEB JOURNAL, XIX, No. 3 (i960), p. 95. Voight, George. "KPFA Seeks Answer to Commercial Pro gramming," SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE, April 15, 1949, p. 4H.

C. PACIFICA FOUNDATION DOCUMENTS Agnew, R. Gordon. Memorandum to Board Members and Sta tion Managers, December 5, 1953. Application for AM Radio Station, Richmond, California. San Francisco: Pacifica Foundation, 1947® (Filed by Pacifica Foundation with the FCC February 6, 1947.) 399 Application for Construction Permit. Filed by Pacifica Foundation with the FCC March 22, 1951• FCC File No. BMPH-4385. Application for Construction Permit for Noncommercial Educational FM Station in Washington, D.C. Filed by Pacifica Foundation with the FCC October 26, 1959. FCC File No. BPED-409. Articles of Incorporation of Pacifica Foundation. San Francisco, 1946. Contained in Application for AM Radio Station, Richmond, California, filed with the FCC February 6, 1947. Board of Directors, Minutes. In Pacifica Files, Berkeley, California. By-Laws of the Pacifica Foundation. In Pacifica Files, Berkeley, California. Broadcast of KPFA, August 3? 1957. In KPFA files, Berkeley, California. Comments of Pacifica Foundation, filed by Pacifica Foun dation with the FCC regarding proposed rule-making Docket 11061, July 19? 1954, and August 30, 1954.

Committee of Directors, Minutes. In Pacifica Files, Berkeley, California. Exemption Affidavit. Filed by Pacifica Foundation, with United States Internal Revenue Service, August 23, 1948. Dallas, Paul. Response to FCC Inquiry of December 20, 1965. Filed by Pacifica Foundation with the FCC January 16, 1967. Hill, Lewis. Memorandum to the Fund for Adult Education, Berkeley, California, undated, but probably about September 25, 1951.

, Memorandum to KPFA Staff, August 3S 1951. , Report to Listeners. Broadcast by KPFA August 7» 1951. Goodman, Robert. Reply to FCC, March 12, 1969> Hoffman, Hallock. Comments to the FCC. Undated but probably June 1965. 400 Memorandum September 29, 1967. Jorgensen, Russell. Memorandum, October 9, 1963. KPFA Campaign, The. Berkeley, Californias Pacifica Foundation, undated, but probably 1950. (Mimeo graphed) KPFA Program Folio. June 19, 19495 March 9, October 7, December 2, 1951J January 13, April 6, October 5, 1952; August 18, 1957; April 13, 1958. KPFA, A Prospectus of the Pacifica Station. Berkeley, California: Pacifica Foundation, May 1948. (Mimeographed) KPFA; A Survey of Its Past and Future. Berkeley, Calif ornia: Pacifica Foundation, January 1951. (Mimeographed) KPFA Subscriber Population Survey, 3965. Berkeley, Calif ornia: Pacifica Foundation, 1965. (Mimeographed) McKinney, Eleanor. KPFA History. In KPFA Files. (Type written) Memorandum to the Secretary of Pacifica Foundation, signed by twenty-six members of the Advisory Council. Berkeley, California, April 28, 1954. Memorandum on Foundation Support for Pacifica Foundation, Prepared for the Fund for Adult Education. Berkeley, California: Pacifica Foundation, July 24 1953. (Mimeographed) Millspaugh, Frank. Reply to FCC inquiry of April 26, 1968. Undated, in Pacifica files. Outline of Budgets and Fund-Raising Procedures for the Development of a Permanent Operation (AM-FM) at KPFA, Berkeley, Based on Listener-Sponsorship; For Extension of Pacifica Broadcasting Activities to Southern California; and For Establishing a Monthly Journal related to these Activities. Berkeley, California: Pacifica Foundation, undated but probably 1956. Pettengil, R. B. FAE Staff Summary of Pacifica Foundation Proposal. Santa Barbara: Fund for Adult Educa tion, September 28, 1951. (Typewritten, in Pacifica files) 401 Polgar, Steve. Survey of KPFA Subscribers. Berkeley, California; Pacifica Foundation, March I960. (Mimeographed) Program Policy. Adopted by Board of Directors, Pacifica Foundation, April 10, 1965. (Mimeographed, in Minutes of Board of Directors, Pacifica Foundation, Berkeley, California.) Proposed Station Structure. Signed by Eleven Department Heads of Pacifica Stations. In Pacifica Files, undated but probably November 1963. A Radio Prospectus. San Francisco^ Pacifica Foundation, July 1946. (Mimeographed) Report to the Executive and Advisory Members of Pacifica Foundation on the Experiences of Radio Station KPFA in its First Five Months. Berkeley, California; Pacifica Foundation, October 1949. (Mimeographed) Report to the Fund for Adult Education. Berkeley, Calif ornia; Pacifica Foundation, September 1952. (Mimeographed) Report to the Fund for Adult Education. Berkeley, Calif ornia; Pacifica Foundation, December 1953. (Mimeographed) Report to Listeners. Broadcasts by Station KPFA, January 11, and May 19, 1952. (In KPFA files) Report of the Structure Committee. Ernest Besig, chairman. San Francisco, February 10, 1954. (Mimeographed) Reply to FCC Inquiry by Pacifica Foundation. January 18, 1960| April 26, 1963. (Typewritten, in Pacifica Files) Schutz, Robert. "To Pacifica Foundation Members and the KPFA Staff." Memorandum, November 20, 1952. (Mimeographed) , Treasurer's Report for Pacifica Foundation. Berkeley, California: Pacifica Foundation, October 30, 1952. (Mimeographed) 402 Schwarzer, William W. (attorney, for the firm of McCutchen, Thomas, Matthew, Griffiths and Green, San Fran cisco). Letter of legal opinion to F. Daniel Frost III, Los Angeles, representing Fund for Adult Education. August 6, 1953. (Typewritten, in Minutes of Executive Membership, Pacifica Foundation, Berkeley) Statement by Pacifica Foundation (press release). November 7, 1963. Strong, Harold. A Report on the Organization and Opera tions of Pacifica Foundation's KPFA Project wj.th Special Reference to Promotion and Public Relations. San FranciscOo August 28, 1952. (Mimeographed, in KPFA files) Thomas, Trevor. Reply to FCC Inquiry of March 1&, 1963. Berkeley, California: Pacifica Foundation, undated. (Typewritten) • , Reply to FCC Inquiry (undated) ref: &320, C02-0614. Berkeley, California; Pacifica Founda tion, May 21, 1963. (Typewritten) , Statement to Subscribers. March 23, 1964. (In Pacifica files.)

D. OTHER DOCUMENTS Bay Area Educational Television Association. By-Laws and Minutes, 1950-1954. In the private records of Mr. George Pettit, Berkeley, California. Communications Act of 1934. 4& Stat. IO64, 47 U.S.C.A. (1934)| I R.R. 10:11-157. Fourth Annual Radio Conference. Proceedings and Recom mendations for Regulation of Radio. Washington; Government Printing Office, 1926. Henry, E. William. Speech to National Association of Broadcasters, Washington, D.C. April 7, 1964. Ragan, George R. Pacifica Radio; A Description of Listener-Subscription Radio. (Unpublished Master's Thesis, Stanford University, 1963.) Schutz, Robert. The Senate Investigation. Berkeley, California, 1967. (Unpublished manuscript) 403 U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee of the Judiciary. Pacifica Foundation, Hearings, before the Internal Security Subcommittee, January 10, 11, and 25, 1963. 86th Congress, 1st session, 1963. U.S. Federal Communications Commission. Annual Reports. Washington: Government Printing Office, annually since 1935. , Docket No. 11061, adopted June 11, 1954. FCC 5*4-717. . , Educational Radio, Bulletin No. 21-B. Wash ington: Government Printing Office, 1966. , Decision re: Applications of Pacifica Foundation 36 FCC 147, 149 (1964). , Decision res Pacifica Foundation, February 28, 1969. , Decision res United Broadcasting Co. 10 FCC 515, 5 R.R. 799, 1945. , Memorandum Opinion re: KTYM, June 17, 1966. T FCC 2d 190, 191-2 (I960) , Memorandum Opinion re: WBAI, March 26, 1969. FCC 69-302, 29228.

a_, Public Service Responsibilities of Broadcast licensees. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1946. , Rules and Regulations. Washington: Government Printing Office. , Third Order and Report, in the Matter of Tele vision Allocations* Washington: Government Print ing Office, 1951. Winston, Donald Charles. Some Personality Attributes of the Serious Music Audience. Unpublished Master's thesis, Stanford University, 1955.

E. PERSONAL INTERVIEWS Day, James. Personal interview with author. San Francisco June 4» 1969. 404 Ford-Aquino, Beverly (Mrs.) Personal Interview with author, San Francisco, July 6, 1968. Jorgensen, Russell. Personal interview with author. San Francisco, June 21, 1968. Meece, Edward. Personal interview with author. San Jose, June 24, 1968. Moore, Richard. Personal interview with author. San Francisco, August 15, 1968. Partridge, Alfred. Personal interview with author. Berkeley, June 10, 1968. Pettit, George. Personal interview with author,. Berkeley June 20, 1969. Schutz, Robert. Personal interview with author. Berkeley June 20, 1968. Thomas, Trevor. Personal interview with author. Berkeley July 1, 1969. Triest, William. Personal interview with author. San Francisco, August 15, 1968.

F. CORRESPONDENCE Hill, Harvey, Registrar, Stanford University. Letter to author, July 29, 1968. Hill, Johnson D. Letters to author. July 12 and 16, 1968 Hill, Joy (Mrs.) Letters to author. August 15, 1968, and May 28, 1969. Hill, Lewis. Correspondence. In Pacifica files, Berkeley California.