Standing
by their decision to keep Democracy Now! off their airwaves, WXXI officials are maintaining their stance that the show
fails to meet the station’s standards for balance and objectivity. City Newspaper placed calls to WXXI
Radio News Director Peter Iglinski and Radio Vice President Jeanne Fisher, and
our questions were referred to Creative Director Jon Haliniak. Following is an
edited transcript of that interview.

City: Where exactly does WXXI stand now in regards to “Democracy
Now!”?

Haliniak: We’ve all
listened to Democracy Now!. We
brought it up with our Community Advisory Board, and they’ve also listened to
it. And we really thought it through a lot and decided just not to carry Democracy Now!. Our primary reason? It’s
centered on journalistic balance in all the news programs we air. As a public
broadcast organization in Rochester, we try to provide our audience a range of
opinions and voices to reflect a non-partisan, independent approach. And we’ve
determined by listening to the program that Democracy
Now! doesn’t really fit that format for us.

City:What is it about the program that fails to
meet WXXI’s standards of balance?

Haliniak: To us, as a
news program, Democracy Now! is a point-of-view
program. We look at other programs we air, Morning
Edition and All Things Considered.
As a whole, they don’t seem to have that very same point of view. But Democracy Now!, to us, as a whole
entity, really does seem to carry a distinct point of view.

City: You do air “Tucker Carlson: Unfiltered.” Carlson [who also
co-hosts “Crossfire” on CNN] is generally considered a contemporary
conservative pundit.

Haliniak: I agree. We
do. But Tucker Carlson is in no way
said to be a news program. It clearly is a point-of-view program, in the same
way NOW with Bill Moyers is a
point-of-view program.

City: So you have encountered instances on “Democracy Now!” where
the host, Amy Goodman, is expressing her personal opinions?

Haliniak: As a body of
work, yeah. We get an impression of that.

City: We have the minutes from WXXI’s May Community Advisory Board
meeting, where “Democracy Now!” is discussed. Radio Vice President Jeanne
Fisher says “‘Democracy Now!’ admits that host Amy Goodman has a political
agenda and that the content of her program is driven by her agenda.” Fisher
also states “Amy Goodman was recently arrested in an anti-war protest in front
of the White House for participating in the demonstration.” I’m wondering what
facts these thoughts are based upon.

Haliniak: Jon Greenbaum,
[an organizer] with Metro Justice, attended our last meeting, and he did sort
of want to make sure there was a correction in the Community Advisory Board
minutes. She [Goodman] wasn’t arrested as a protestor. She was arrested as a
reporter. We have made that correction.

City: And what about the comment Fisher made about “Democracy
Now!” admitting that the show is driven by Amy Goodman’s political agenda? I
haven’t been able to find a place where “Democracy Now!” admits such a thing.

Haliniak: I think,
again, that goes to the body of work. We listened to the program enough to get
a sense of it. And it really is a staff-managerial-programming decision on our
end. That’s our impression of the program. A greater good is served by what we
consider to be the most fair, balanced news programs we can offer our
membership.

We’re
not in any way trying to block Democracy
Now! from appearing in the Rochester market. It’s just not going to be on
WXXI. We’ve tried to be as fair as possible with this.

City: When you add new programming, how do you attempt to achieve
the balance you’re after?

Haliniak: We get so
many offers for content. And we really consider all of them on a one-on-one
basis. Normally when we add a new program, it’s not at the expense of another
show of its ilk. We just balance overall programming. We look towards ideology
and content in the same way NPR (National Public Radio) gauges all its
programming with a sharp eye towards balance. It’s a diversity of viewpoints we’re
trying to get across. So over the whole body of work, we get an informed
balance that our audience can make its own decisions on.

City:Public broadcasting has historically taken
some flack for leaning too far to the left, at least in the eyes of certain
politicians. But a recent study by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR)
concludes that Republican sources outnumber Democratic sources in NPR reports
by more than 3 to 2, and representatives from right-wing think tanks outnumber
those from the left 4 to 1. It doesn’t appear that this perfect balance has
been struck quite yet.

Haliniak: If you look
at the phone calls we get, people complain about us being too right-leaning,
too left-leaning. We joke that since we’re hearing an equal number of complaints,
we’re probably doing a pretty good job.

NPR
at least monitors what they do to strike a balance on a consistent level, and
we respect that. From our own perspective, we try to do the same thing. We get
reports from FAIR and other places as well, how NPR is taken, how we as an
organization are taken. We just try to strike as much of a fair balance of
programming, and we think we’re doing a pretty good job with that. For what
it’s worth, our last ratings period was as good as it’s ever been. At least we’re
doing something right.

City:One of the criticisms I hear of WXXI’s
decision not to air “Democracy Now!” is that it’s a sign the station is scared
to challenge its audience’s intellect. And when critics say this, they cite the
fact that you guys are still airing reruns of “Are You Being Served?” and “The
Lawrence Welk Show.”

Haliniak: Those are
clearly entertainment programs. And there’s a large section of our audience
that appreciates them. We get a lot of letters, a lot of thanks for programs
like Lawrence Welk and Are You Being Served? People love them.

City:The other thing critics say is that WXXI
should be presenting alternative viewpoints; that functioning as an alternative
is one of the main roles of public broadcasting. And they consider “Democracy
Now!” to be one of the best news shows at presenting views you don’t get in the
mainstream.

Haliniak: Being one of
the last independently owned radio stations in the Rochester market, we really
take that to heart. We have a certain responsibility. But, again, looking over
the body of what we offer — everything from Talk of the Nation to All
Things Considered to 1370 Connection — we do challenge our audience on a number of levels. We don’t think we’re
lacking at all in that area.

City:Based on WXXI’s standards for balance, how
would you say “Democracy Now!” is any different from “1370 Connection”?

Haliniak: Our opinion is
that Democracy Now! doesn’t fit our
format for fair and balanced reporting. We’re committed to a sort of neutral
balance in our news reporting. With the polarization we’re seeing in the media
right now, you know, left and right, we’re striving to be an alternative to
that polarization. We want to be a middle ground so all issues can be heard.
And Democracy Now! is a program that
we consider unbalanced. On our air, it would be swaying our balance. Our
integrity as an alternative, non-polarized station would be harmed.

City: Can you cite any specifics that illustrate why “Democracy
Now!” is not balanced?

Haliniak: I can’t really
give you exact words or quotes, because we’re looking at it as a whole body of
work. Putting it up against the rest of our news programs, this show has a
point of view and doesn’t fit our balance. And that’s a decision we’re going to
stand by.

City: If more contributing listeners were to voice their desire to
have the program aired on WXXI, would that change your decision?

Haliniak: At this
point, no.

City: During WXXI’s discussions of “Democracy Now!” was there any
talk about the impact that program has had on fundraising for various stations?

Haliniak: Only the
anecdotal stuff we’ve received that it outperforms Morning Edition in other markets. And I gotta tell you, we found
that a little hard to believe. Our fundraising here is strong with Morning Edition. How Democracy Now! performs in other markets
is not necessarily relevant to us. Besides, our programming decisions aren’t
based on what we think the shows can bring in. It’s an integrity choice. The
claim that Democracy Now! makes more
than Morning Edition or other shows,
there’s really been nothing from our end to back that up.

This article appears in Oct 13-19, 2004.