Reader feedback 8.11.04

MEDIA WATCH

By the time WRUR completes all the program changes and
personnel, they will have lost their listenership
(“Anything but Static,” July 14). For the past six years, I’ve enjoyed
listening to the Friday nights Blues programs by Scott Wallace and Doug Curry.
My husband and I would arrange our evening around their programs and became
reluctant to commit ourselves to the RPO Symphony 101 series because of the
great music they both played.

            It wasn’t
only the music we enjoyed, but the information they passed on about the
artists. Then on Saturday morning there was the Celtic music, which enlightened
me about different styles of Irish music other than “Danny Boy.” Of
course, there was John Sebaste having fun with his
Italian music and sending out dedications to local people. It was simply just a
fun kind of station to listen to.

            Now that
WRUR, WXXI, and UR Broadcasting continue to change and drop formats and bicker
as to who is going to get their way, I’ve just stopped listening to the
station. In essence, when WXXI took over WRUR to “help out,” it might
have been an electronic advancement, but they have seriously floundered in
management technique. That has left the people who listen to the station
finding music on other stations.

            Fortunately,
WITR has an incredible Blues program on Sundays, and WGMC also offers a great
variety of music. And, if I can’t listen to these stations…
I’ll hum!

            Laurie B. Ammering,
Strong
Street, Rochester

Thank you for exposing what’s going on at WXXI’s recent radio-station “acquisition,” WRUR. The
station was once a fabulous place to go for unique entertainment and a respite
from reality.

            If I want
to listen to WXXI-AM, I know how to find that on the radio dial. I do not want
to tune in to WRUR to hear all the horrible news of the world.

            There is no
longer any rhyme or reason about what programs will be on WRUR, and when. I’ve
given up listening to a station to which I was a loyal listener for many years.

            The
disrespect with which they have treated and are treating their wonderful,
talented, dedicated group of volunteer disc
jockeys is unconscionable. I feel sadness for the DJ’s who gave 20 years and
more to WRUR but are no longer there as a result of the new organization.

            It’s amazing
to me that the few remaining DJ’s continue to jump through the mandated,
confusing, unreliable hoops they’re required to navigate to stay on the air.

            People who
love what they do have to go through all the preparation for a program,
pre-record it, and then wonder when or if it will be recorded or how many weeks
in a row the same program will air.

            WRUR owes a
lot of people — staff and listeners — some major apologies.

            Cheryl Alger Mann, West Main Street, Honeoye

I have followed with much interest the recent articles and
letters about Democracy Now!, WRUR, and WXXI. The
paranoia of station managers seems inexplicable without an understanding of the
culture wars that have shaped public broadcasting.

            Early on,
NPR suffered the most benign of neglects. Remaining below the political radar,
with a tiny budget, it was nurtured by a talented group of idealistic
broadcasters who believed that media could serve democracy by giving voice to
ideas that challenged conventional wisdom. They inspired many others around the
nation to bring the same sort of high-minded purpose to local stations. We
thought radio could be enlightening, elevating, and educational in the best
sense.

            By the
early Reagan years, NPR’s coverage of the Iran
hostage debacle and the economic malaise made it an opinion maker, and
therefore a threat. The administration found a target in some apparent
budgetary irregularities of NPR management, triggering a financial crisis at
the network. After that, you could discern a tightening of editorial scope,
less of the free-spirited adventurism that made the network so captivating. The
biggest loss was cultural programming, which NPR abandoned almost entirely.
Research indicated that news could draw more listeners. Lectures, modern art,
non-mainstream ideas were, it was thought, boring or offensive to the preferred
audience: middle-class, professional, high-income, moderately conservative.

            It worked
— numbers went up as the tone became more uniform. NPR became a brand, and a
brand works best when it is bland. The format of most current public radio
programs won’t challenge the audience with ideas that stray toward the margins.
There’s no time for that, not when balance must be maintained.

            Balance. This perversion of the principal of fairness into
the straightjacket of pre-approved sourcing is a result of the second great
attack on American public media, The Gingrich Revolution. Remember the old
“zero out” campaign? A creature called Newt, though he was humanoid,
led an effort to eliminate tax-revenue financing of all public broadcasting.
It’s doubtful that he and the other animals thought they could entirely de-fund
it, but what they did accomplish was, for their purposes, even better.

            They
neutralized it as a cultural resource. Rather than leading the way, NPR has
abandoned the true spirit of social debate to the new media the network feared
the most — the Web and cable/satellite services. But that was the path of
survival, and the lesson wasn’t lost on some local stations. By relying on
formulaic, fully-vetted network shows or innocuous DJ programs, managers could
avoid headaches from aroused, well-financed special interests. (And by that, I
don’t mean Metro Justice.) Forget about Democracy Now! — it’s
not slick enough, and it doesn’t toe the line.

            Now, even
DJ shows on little college stations are a threat to conformity and public
morals. Who knows when somebody might put on the Clash or Public Enemy or
something else subversive? Our delicate minds, our terrorized emotions wouldn’t
stand it!

            I got over
missing NPR. I find ideas and information elsewhere, and listen to Democracy
Now! via the Internet. But more than once over the
past few years I’ve asked myself, “where is NPR
— the old NPR — when we desperately need it?”

            The closest
I can come to one answer is that we let it go — we Americans. Yes, we kept
pledging, enough to keep the lights on, but we were willing to allow Washington
politics, and its local expressions, to have its way. And if the reactionary
tidal wave could wash away NPR’s self-confidence, what has happened at NBC,
CBS, ABC, CNN, or the FCC was bound to follow. When held by the throat, it
doesn’t take much twisting to turn an important institution against its best
instincts. But the consequences for our Republic are lasting and tragic.

            Carl Pultz, Redfern Drive, Rochester

ADDING UP

Thank you for filling the void on reporting the deaths of
our troops in this ridiculous war (“Body Count,” in City weekly). And of course the Bush administration wants to let
big media companies control even more.

            I am amazed
at the lack of coverage. I guess the 900th death is less important than the
first.

            Tom Koch, Hoover Road, Irondequoit

RIOTS’ CAUSES

I found Walter Cooper’s article on the 1964 riots most
interesting (July 21). Having moved to Rochester
in 1997, there’s a lot about my new city’s
history that I don’t know. I can also understand how the racism of that time
would anger the community as much as it did.

            The one
part about this most informative article I didn’t like was the way it ended.
Mr. Cooper seemed a bit disappointed that what he perceives as a case of
modern-day apathy within the African-American community wouldn’t make another
riot possible. I found that sentiment to be most disappointing. There’s a big
difference between peacefulprotest
and rioting. It’s one of our fundamental rights to protest peacefully over
injustices. There is no justification to violence. In the 1964 riots people
were killed, most of them innocent, and property was damaged, and I assume that
most of those property owners were equally innocent.

            It’s a good
thing to encourage activism, and the peaceful protest over injustices; but
activism and protest have to be done responsibly. A riot is not a responsible form of protest.

            Jonathan White, Dartmouth Street, Rochester

            Walter Cooper replies: I thank
you for your comments, however, I believe that my myriad public service to this
community supports unequivocally my opposition to riots of any type, and at any
time, to redress real or perceived grievances.

            The riots
of the ’60s and ’70s that engulfed urban communities across the United
States were mostly derived from antagonistic
relations between minority communities and law-enforcement agencies. Since the Rochester
riots, although not ideal, police-community relations have improved
significantly.

            Also, my
conclusion was based upon the proposition that without a relatively cohesive
and aggressive minority community coupled with a corrosive relationship with
the police, the probability of riots is negligible. And for the sake of the Rochester,
I hope I am right in my assessment.

BLUE IN THE FACE

In response to Dave Atias’ letter
in City Newspaper (“Angel Attack,”
July 28-August 3) regarding his apparent displeasure with the Blue Angels
shaking windows, etc., in Rochester:

            Mr. Atias, I would like to tell you that I was living and
working in New York City on September 11, 2001. I was on my way
to work at the Council on Foreign Relations, located uptown on 68th
Street and Park Avenue. On
that morning, uptown workers and residents witnessed a huge brown cloud in the
sky that was the demise of the two towers of the WorldTradeCenter.

            For several
weeks after 9/11, fighter jets flew over Manhattan.
In my small office overlooking Park Avenue, I could hear
and feel the impact of the jets that were circling to prevent any further harm
to our homeland. My office window and building shook constantly. Manhattan
residents had many sleepless evenings due to the fighter jets interrupting the
quiet of the night sky.

            So many of
us lost loved ones and were afraid there was more to come. I was very thankful
to know that these pilots were in the sky to protect our country.

            Although
you think it is an inconvenience, I reflect upon the airshow
as a majestic display of America’s
finest. On any given day, I will gladly hear the impact of these wonderful
pilots displaying their talents and think of their superb training and
commitment to our country.

            Nancy Barra, South Goodman Street, Rochester

The Blue Angels flew over Rochester
and it was loud. We know. We were there. To call this an “attack” is an
exaggeration of the grossest degree. My neighbors recently threw a party with a
lot of late-night revelry and loud music. Their volume was an annoyance, not an
“attack.”

            I had the
same problem with the opening sentence of Dave Atias’
careless rant. “Earlier this month, the Blue Angels terrorized Rochester.”
Are you serious? I was visiting New York City
when actual terrorists attacked. I, and millions of
others, experienced real terror. You heard an airshow.
There’s a difference.

            Furthermore,
the article’s conclusion was that the people of Iraq
have experienced much suffering (true) and that the Green Party does not
support war (possibly). Thank you for the update Mr. Atias,
but what is the point you are trying to make? That the current war on terror
should focus less on the Middle East and more on our
feared stunt pilots? That voting for Nader in 2004
will end the Blue Angels’ reign of terror over Rochester?

            This Blue
Angels/Green Party rallying cry just reads like mud.

            Andy Davis, Arnett Boulevard, Rochester

ZONED OUT

I noticed your article on Empire Zones completely failed to
even mention the recent expansion of Eastview Mall in
Victor, where the mall developer was literally able to buy Empire
Zone-designated acreage from Geneva to build upscale restaurants, upscale
shops, and provide valet parking for customers.

            If any
example of how this program has, however well-intentioned, become blatantly
corrupt and bastardized, this example shows it clearly. How can anyone argue
that this was anything other than state-subsidized tax evasion? A thorough
investigation of Empire Zones and other state grants and subsidies would likely
show a high number of political favors being paid.

            I don’t buy
the argument that we would be worse off if it weren’t for state subsidies and
Empire Zones. Our legislators have created an environment so hostile to
enterprise, these ideas seem necessary. The colossal ineptitude of the people
and parties running this state has left it nearly in ruins. We are worse off.
We would be better off with less people on the state payroll, lower taxes, and
less state spending. Those things are never, ever considered.

            The sooner
the governor and legislature learn that reducing taxes, lowering fees, and
generally softening the rules and regulations that quite literally suffocate
business and individual enterprise in this state, the sooner successful enterprise
will develop on its own. Individuals are taxed half to death in this state. If
more people actually looked at how much they pay daily in state, local, school,
gas, and sales taxes, New York
would have the highest suicide rate in the country. Luckily, instead, we have
the most apathetic voters in the country. How they can vote year after year for
more of the same nonsense defies logic.

            Think when
you vote.

            Sean Fagan, Bloomfield

WRITING TO CITY

We welcome and encourage readers’ letters for publication.
Send them to: themail@rochester-citynews.com or The Mail, City Newspaper, 250
North Goodman Street, Rochester14607.

            Our
guidelines: We don’t publish anonymous letters — and we ask that you include
your street name and city/town/village. We don’t publish letters that have been
sent to other media. While we don’t restrict length, letters of under 350 words have a greater chance of being published. We
do edit letters for clarity and brevity. And in general we don’t publish
letters (or longer “op-ed” pieces) from the same writer more often than about
once every two months.

This article appears in Aug 11-17, 2004.