UPDATED: KUOW, KIRO, robin adair, and the appearance of fairness

It's a little troubling.

We're always tooting our horns about NPR because (like Michael Medved) we believe in it, listen to it, and think it's great radio product. We've participated in public radio in a minor way both locally and nationally for years.

There's good reason NPR is so popular in Seattle, the most bookish city in the country this side of the Charles River- is because it's smart and balanced in its news coverage, and broad in its programming scope.

The in-depth treatment of public policy issues is unequalled. The time on the Seattle NPR affiliate KUOW spends on such as initiatives and referenda is really important.

Public radio's sense of equal time is still paramount in an age that the moribund Fairness Doctrine is gleefully known as the evil government regulation that Rush Limbaugh got rid of.

So when we recently heard that independent U.S. Senate candidate, Robin Adair was not allowed entrée into the forums on KUOW talk shows, we were puzzled.

What bothers us is that the decision to exclude her flies in the face of one of our favorite speeches about the very idea of public radio: that unlike commercial radio, they can program niches that don't necessarily attract a wide (read marketable) audience.

We're always teasing locally produced NPR shows like Weekday with Steve Scher for droning on about such arcania as fish psychology, Canadian rap music or Serbian water rights.

But actually we love that that kind of stuff can be heard despite that it might not pencil. That's the beauty of it- ratings be damned!

Anyone who's been around this election cycle knows Robin Adair. Her quixotic run at Maria Cantwell's job is based on her complicated-to-damn-nigh-inscrutable economic theory that she'll sneak into any conversation and to anyone with the time and the head for that sort of thing.

She's a gracious lady of a certain age who knows she's not going to win, but has paid the price of admission, raised some 16,000 bucks, hasn't got three heads- and is a legally registered candidate.

She says she was told by KUOW that independents were not allowed, yet Linnea Noreen the only other independent candidate in the state, appeared on The Conversation with Ross Reynolds today.

But Linnea apparently met the critieria that KUOW's Arvid Hokanson, spelled out to us in an e-mail:

We don't have specific benchmarks. Like other media outlets, we use our
professional judgement to determine with whom to conduct news
interviews. We look at polling, FEC reports, campaign structure and draw
some guidance from the Debate Advisory Standards Project. In Robin
Adair's case, she lists zero donations from individual contributors on
her FEC forms. Linnea has contributors, yard signs and volunteers.
Linnea has also gained some good attention from other media outlets.
Linnea has her positions well laid out on her website and easy to read.
In Robin's case, I personally have trouble determining her positions
from how they are written out. Before she ran for Senate, she shared her
philosophies in-person on several subjects with more than one member of
the program staff, myself included. Even with that, I still find it hard
for her to articulate her positions. 

KIRO's Tina Nole, producer for Dave Ross and Ron Reagan, sees it differently. "We like to cover the big stories from various perspectives," she says, "so often highlighting the lesser known players makes for interesting conversations and informative programing."

Noles put Adair on the Dave Ross Show and she did well enough for the money grubbing ratings whores of commercial radio. "Actually," says Noles, "she's a smart woman, and she was very interesting on the air."

Then Adair went out to lunch with Dave Ross.

"We hear so much from the candidates with a lot of money," says Noles, snatching-up the high road, "and talk radio is a perfect place to allow those other candidates the opportunity to have their voice heard."

Well, yeah.

We have no question that KUOW acted legally and in a good faith. But as a political decision, we don't think it was a good one.

There were only but two independents in the whole state- KUOW gave one of them a platform. How difficult could it have been to provide the same for the other?

It's about the appearance of fairness.

~~

UPDATE: KUOW'S criteria for candidates' financial viablity thinned a little today with the Seattle Times reporting that Linnea Noreen's "contributions" were augmented mightily by her mortgaging her condo for $40,000. This is not unlike Libertarian Senate candidate Bruce Guthrie who mortgaged his house in order to buy his way into a TV debate. There's nothing illegal or unethical about that, but spare us the 'financially viable', already- this green is astro-turf. It's another way someone with assets can buy onto the public platform and theoretically, into office. It's not like taking much of a risk- they don't even need to spend what they borrow, their campaign just needs to have it.

Comments

[joanie]

I feel the same disappointment in KUOW here that I felt in KCTS Connects when I realized they censor on-line program feedback.

Unexpected and diminishes their integrity.

[joanie]

As I'm wandering around here in my normal morning fog, I'm recalling that I did hear part of Dave's show with her. I remember thinking that she wasn't clear nor were her positions completely thought out.

But, she did take calls and I do agree that every candidate should have mulitiple opportnities to be heard.

[ROBIN ADAIR]

FROM ROBIN ADAIR
1.Thank You for understanding that a qualified (if poor) candidate needs to have a fair chance to speak
2. I am not a One Issue candidate ...
MY QUALIFICATIONS INCLUDE:

A Political Philosophy & Econ degree CLAREMONT
mentioned by MILTON FRIEDMAN-U/Chicago Group's Martin Diamone (Scripps College).

>>I was trained in theoretical economics -- and have new work.
>>I am also a CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLAR and have testified before a U S Senare Committee about a corrupt and unconstitutional court in Wa. State.
>>I am an "amateur" FIELD GEOLOGIST (most of
Degree with Dennis Hibbert) in petrology (oil),
hydrology (water), global warming...and have
tramped the West, China, and Mid East (with
old Aramco maps !)
>>I have more years executive administrative experience than any other candidate (community
work ).

3. Michael called me Quixotic, the Libertarians
early on accused me of not really getting the signatures I needed to qualify, the Seatlle Times
asked me is I was a "real" candidate, I have
been labeled the "mystery" candidate -- and weeks after I'd qualified and my website had been up for 2 months The Postman asked "Who is Robin Adair? Is this a man or a woman? Why no
website?" After that it was widely quoted "disappearing" me more each time. Amazing! I'M A VERY PRETTY GRANDMOTHER WITH A WICKED
SENSE OF HUMOR AND OTS OF VERY ORIGINAL THINKING.
...VERY FEW MEDIA SOURCES RESPONDED TO OUR COMMUNICATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS -- it was like trying to move sound through an airless space !!

Many Newspapers had Questionnaires, and some
pulbic organizations , too -- most of which I answered in time. I was filmed by all the Public Access Stations, and KING5 did a very nice
interview at The Ruins. There were many Forums :
but -- to give one example: I drove 500 miles
round trip to Vancouver and was allow 4 minutes
to make a statement -- but I did meet and talk
to a lot of wonderful people. The next night I was
on Orcas Island for the same experience. I have come home to as many as 100 e-mails some nights and have done my best to answer them candidly. I have shaken hands with about 15,000 people this year running for office. I've addressed college classes (the teachers had seen my credentials), and Rotaries and other groups. It's been a wonderful thing !!
WITHOUT PUBLIC ACCESS AND MEDIA HOW COULD I REACH ALL THE PEOPLE ??

This negative silence treatment is not good for
American Democracy!

4."CONFUSING" : THE ECONOMY/MY WEBSITE

You bet my new theory work is CONFUSING! It is
complicated -- I have found something UNEXPECTED CHANGING ALL DEFINITIONS.

[ The work has generated a "Feynman
Diagram", fit's Occam's Razor, and is proving
"Unified"-- that's about as good as it gets for a
theorist!" I have begun to design law to reverse
the sick economy smoothly...it's good work !]
"robinadairsenate.com"

MY WEBSITE'S A THEORIST "BLOGGING" THEORY

as it unfolds, top to bottom.... [That is after my photo, the reasons I am running, directions
to the sub-sites and my "Issue Positions", and a quick look at the economy ]....
THEN A "THEORIST'S NOTEBOOK", ideas changing, growing, with "COCKTAIL NAPKIN DIAGRAMS" , Characterisitics, simple lists of ideas to... and I
get good feedback... OR TOTAL CONFUSION !!

5. BACK TO FREE SPEECH ..

.KUOW kept switching it's position when I would guest and then ON WHY I COULDN'T "GUEST". And others were involved. I was told (1) it was because I was an Independent, not a Party, first. (2) Then I was e-mailed that the "Conversation" staff declined to interview me, (3) The University OF Washington e-mailed to say it was an editorial decision allowed KUOW, (4) the FCC in Washington DC said i had no right to equal time ...Then (5) Linnea Noreen (the Other Independent) was invited on "The Conversation" and Arvid e-mailed Blatherwatch that (6) I didn't have any campaign contributions and no yard signs, (but he was wrong : we have had many contribution under the size requiring individual reporting and I do have volunteers and an active Committee)-- just not ENOUGH money to get into commercial advertizing!, and (7) Arvid mentioned he'd heard my economic work and looked at my website and it was "confusing" [I'm a volunteer at KUOW and all of them have listened to me as that work grew...
long before I LOOKED HARD AT WHAT WAS
HAPPENING IN WASHINGTON D.C. AND IRAQ AND
DECIDED TO STAND FORWARD AS ANOTHER VOICE !!
I think that the time was getting
short and KUOW labeled me
a "Non-Candidate" and a waste of time !

6. Michael Hood (Blatherwatch), Dave Ross and
Tina Nole, the good statiion in Olympia, and
npr Spokane all thought I had things worth hearing !
And lunch was fabulous, Dave!

Thank You for featuring this story -- it really
points out how difficult it is to step foreward
as a very qualified citizen-camdidate and get a public hearing !

Sincerely, Robin Adair, [email protected]

[joanie]

Have to comment on two items here and hope you read them . . .

1. I hate the way Pelz and probably the whole institutionalized party structures on both sides isolate campaigns . . . ie Hong Tran. We do not have open and accessible campaigns and we are the worse for it. All media has a responsibility in a democratic society to present all voices many times. And I would especially like to hear many open discussions among candidates - especially candidates with similar views. I want to know where they disagree.

2. Your appearance on Ross' show was similar to your post above . . . almost stream of conscious discussion which was hard to follow. Theories need to be proven to be implemented. Least I think they do! I think you are a whole lot smarter than me but I have to understand the ramifications of ideas before I buy into them. Some callers led you to conclusions or attempts to explain yourself that left me wondering . . .

Thank you for open ended thinking because I am all for that. But, we need to explore before accepting. :)

[joanie]

Robin, forget my #2 . . . after rereading your post, I think you explained yourself pretty well!

As you point out, a lot of people did focus on irrelevant details rather than examining your qualifications and ideas . . . (which I still felt were poorly articulated on Ross' show) but you did deserve better! With more time and more appearances, you may have overcome the problem of trying to explain complicated matters in short sound bites. My compliments to Ross and Tina for having you on.

I feel silly that I didn't reread more carefully before posting . . . :)

[Mike Barer]

I'll never forget election day in 1994, caught in a rainstorm listening to Republican after Republican win, and the kicker was finding out that Newt Gingrich would be Speaker. I had the same feeling waking up the next morning that I would later have the day after 9/11

[robin adair]

Thank you everyone. And joanie, for re-examining !! I will be at Montlake Ale House Tues, nite -- tho this will post later. And I will be there each Tues. nite for "Drinking Liberally". I want to talk with economists (and also with geologists -- as I have a all new take on Warming ). I had no idea what blogging was 3 months ago, nor that so many of the bright people I was meeting were FAMOUS bloggers. (I really have spent 2 1/2 years doing nothing but research and working on the econ theory -- a life-dream -- and one which will finally repay my great Claremont proffs). Now this
campaign : and because I just pick up the phone and reach people it has lead me to contacts across the nation! THANK YOU ALL !
Robin Adair. (My typing does not count !)

[Lucia Scordamaglia]

I would like to put my two cents into this discussion as well. I am one of the people that helped Robin Adair with her senate campaign these past couple of months. At fist I was skeptical because I had never really met an independent (read non-politician) candidate before and I had no idea what to expect, and well, as everyone knows, not too much credit is given to those who fall outside the realms of democrat or republican. However, after meeting with Robin on multiple occasions and discussing her theories with her, I was seriously impressed. I was confused by some of the theory work, as I really have no background in that sort of thing, but I took the time to try to understand as much of it as I could and it surprised me. The simple truths that Robin showed me seemed so obvious.
One of the things that I liked the most about Robin was that she wasn't caught up in how much money she could spend on T.V. ads or how often she could bad-mouth the other candidates. She was interested in letting the country know what she had found. She wanted to get her ideas and theories out there to help the American public recover from a failing economy that the rest of our government seems content to ignore.
I find it appalling that someone who was legally registered as a candidate for the November ballots was denied the right to speak on PUBLIC radio. It now seems so fake of KUOW to make mention of how they would love to hear from all the candidates and get all sides of the story. How do they plan to do that when they don't allow a candidate, the very people they claim to want to interview, to speak their mind over the airwaves?
I only hope that some of you who read this will take the time to write KUOW and any other supposedly public forum that seeks to disallow a particular person or point of view from being spoken. Remember, the issue here is not Robin or her ideas, it is the simple fact that a public forum denied a citizen her voice. Would you accept it if it happened to you?