CIPB PROPOSAL FOR A PUBLIC BROADCASTING TRUST

I. THE CRISIS OF U.S. PUBLIC BROADCASTING

Our democracy requires some space in our vast system of communications 
that is not controlled by the imperatives of power or profit. This would 
be space where issues can be explored without censorship; where programs 
are not designed around product placements and commercial interruptions; 
where program ideas are not driven by selling audiences to advertisers; 
where minorities can be served without concern for ratings. This age of 
increasing concentration of media ownership into fewer and larger 
corporate giants makes the need for alternative perspectives and sources 
of information even more crucial.  

This was the mission envisioned for public broadcasting when it was 
founded: to serve as "a forum for controversy and debate" and "a voice 
for groups in the community that may otherwise be unheard" so that we 
could "see America whole, in all its diversity."  Over the years, public 
broadcasting has made many distinguished contributions to fulfilling 
this mission.  Unfortunately, political and economic constraints have 
prevented a good service from becoming excellent.

Public broadcasting in other industrial democracies typically enjoys
an independent source of revenue, much higher levels of funding, more 
money for program production, a broader schedule of programs, and bigger 
audiences. In contrast, public broadcasting in the U.S. must depend on a 
broad mix of Congressional and legislative appropriations, subscriber 
donations and corporate and foundation underwriting. This fragmented 
funding structure brings with it pervasive pressures to restrict grant 
support and air time to programs that will appeal to those who control 
the purse strings. 

As a consequence, U.S. public broadcasters have felt forced by 
circumstances to play it safe. There typically are nightly and weekly 
programs featuring Wall Street and business news, but no regular programs 
that examine the economy from the perspective of workers, consumers or 
environmentalists. PBS' one nightly news program duplicates the same 
reliance on official voices as commercial network news. Local news and 
public affairs programs are much too rare. Public broadcasting's unique 
mission demands that it present public affairs programming that 
stimulates civic education and engagement.

In recent years, the very non-commercial nature of the service has been 
under assault. There are more co-production deals with commercial 
partners looking for marketing spin-offs. There are e-commerce services 
and partnerships with retail outlets. Before she quit recently, PBS 
Program chief Kathy Quattrone complained, "Many program decisions are 
being based not on the program value they bring but what kind of a deal 
it can bring." Five-second underwriting acknowledgements have expanded 
into 30-second commercials, including enticements on children's programs 
for junk food and theme parks. Former PBS President Bruce Christensen 
has warned that, unless the funding problems can be solved, public 
broadcasting "will become a commercial medium in the next century."

While increasing commercialism might serve the bottom line (if not 
mission) of a few stations, it threatens the survival of small market 
and state owned stations. A 1995 Lehman Brothers study for the 
Corporation for Public Broadcasting concluded that more advertising 
would cause subscriber contributions and federal appropriations to 
decline, resulting in "a net loss" for public television. A 1999 study 
by Audience Research Associates found that 44 percent of public radio's 
audience would cut back on their contributions if business underwriting 
spots increased.

In 1999, former PBS President Ervice Duggan reported that some station 
leaders proposed that the social contract for PBS be changed from 
"noncommercial" to "nonprofit." He feared this would lead to the 
broadcasting's non-taxable status and copyright concessions. At the 
least, all justification for public money would disappear.

In this context, we also are concerned about the self-interested drive 
by many big market stations to eliminate secondary ":overlapped" 
stations. A 1989 PBS study of secondary stations found duplication of 
programming to be "very low." As compared to primary stations, 
secondary station schedules were "more diverse" and secondary station 
managers "more responsive to local audience needs." We can and must 
keep all our reserved frequencies and improve local programming at 
the same time. 

Finally, we understand well the nature, possibilities and costs of the 
emerging telecommunications technologies. We also know that the public 
interest will not be adequately represented in the pending digital 
transition unless public broadcasters choose to assert it.


II.  THE CIPB PROPOSAL FOR A PUBLIC BROADCASTING TRUST

The time has come to restructure the public broadcasting service as an 
independently funded public trust, comparable to the Red Cross, U.S. 
International Olympic Committee or Little League Baseball. This would 
take it off the federal dole, remove corporate advertising, stop the 
desperate search for money, and free public broadcasting to pursue its 
mission with editorial integrity. 

To support innovative, diverse, noncommercial programming for both national 
and local audiences, an independent public broadcasting service would require 
at least $1 billion in insulated annual program funds, in addition to current 
levels of operational support from state governments, individual subscribers, 
and foundations. Corporate donations would be briefly acknowledged and 
restricted to general system support.

STRUCTURE
A new Public Broadcasting Trust (PBT) would replace the President's patronage 
appointed Corporation for Public Broadcasting. It also would take over the 
satellite distribution systems now administered by PBS and NPR. In contrast 
to the CPB, the PBT Board of Trustees would be insulated from direct 
political pressure.

The PBT would have nine members with appointments made by representatives 
of the public broadcasting community (3), educational community (3) and 
President's Commission on the Arts and Humanities (2). The PBT Managing 
Director would be the ninth member, selected by the original eight board 
members. All members would serve staggered six-year terms. Participants 
in the nominating process would include representatives of public 
television and radio stations, independent producers, and associations 
for school administrators, teachers, academics, librarians, and school boards.

One half of the PBT's funds would go into commissioning, producing, and 
distributing programs as part of a national service to local stations. 
The national television service would be administered through a Television 
Program Department, itself divided into a Division of News and Public 
Affairs and a Division of Cultural and Educational Programming.

This programming, with funds for promotion, would be offered to local 
public stations free-of-charge. Thus, the Department would provide for 
a daily in-depth news program, documentaries, specials and coverage of 
special events as well as arts, entertainment, dramatic, and children's 
programming. Consistent with the unique mission of public broadcasting, 
there would be a premium on public affairs and cutting edge artistic 
presentations in prime time.

Within the Program Department, there would be a National Independent 
Program Laboratory, with a director and its own advisory board. This 
Laboratory would support independent productions for consideration by 
both local stations and the national service. The other half of the 
PBT's funds would be passed through to local television and radio stations 
to produce and acquire programs of interest to their specific communities. 
Since local program production is disproportionately costly, this fund 
will support productions that few stations now undertake for their community.

In addition, there would be a Radio Department to distribute funds to 
national programming services, like NPR and PRI, as well as independent 
producers. The Radio Department would commission new programs as well as 
support existing programs, all of which would be offered to local stations 
via satellite. The Radio Department also would make grants to local radio 
stations to produce national programs and program segments. These would be 
offered to local stations for their own choosing.

FUNDING
At present the U.S. enjoys a $1 trillion budget surplus, in addition to a 
$2 billion Social Security surplus. Just two percent of the 1 trillion 
surplus ($20 billion), invested at five percent interest, would provide 
$1 billion a year to fund public broadcasting programming in perpetuity. 
With voter ignorance high and participation at an all-time low, what a 
wonderful investment in our democracy that would be. This makes it very 
clear that the main obstacle to this reform is not lack of funds, but 
lack of political vision.

The supporters of Citizens for Independent Public Broadcasting believe 
that any proposal for funding a Public Broadcasting Trust must respect 
the following criteria: Is it fair, is it sufficient, and is it reliable? 
We generally favor proposals that tax corporate profits rather than 
citizens and consumers for public broadcasting services. The following 
revenue sources would each provide the $1 billion per year needed to endow 
the trust: a five percent tax on factory sales of digital television sets, 
a five percent tax on the sale or transfer of commercial broadcast licenses, 
a two percent tax on annual broadcast advertising, a two percent annual 
spectrum fee, or a modest tax on the auction of up to $100 billion in 
digital spectrum. Any smaller combination of the above also could produce 
the $1 billion required to support the trust. 

LOCAL AND COMMUNITY ACCOUNTABILITY 
The culture that governs the current system has been years in the making and, 
without structural intervention, will persist. New measures are needed to 
protect public service broadcasting from censorship by state and community-
level politicians and to ensure that boards are truly diverse, have a clear 
sense of mission and recruit and reward station managers for measurable 
public service, rather than profit-making ventures. 

The thrust of these new measures would be to empower local communities to 
actively oppose censorship and advocate for the full diversity of their 
programming needs. For starters, stations would be required to observe 
existing FCC rules and regulations. This would include posting board and 
committee meetings widely and making them open to the public. This also 
would include providing members of the public with easy access to complete 
public inspection files, including financial reports and correspondence 
with viewers and listeners. A properly functioning Public Broadcasting 
Trust would supervise random accountability audits. There would be procedures 
to identify non-compliance and to facilitate compliance on threat of loss 
of funding.

It is essential that boards be chosen in such a manner as to ensure diversity 
by race, gender, age, community, and field of service. A diverse board would 
make policy discussions broader and more inclusive, better survey the 
interests of public constituencies and provide easier access for station 
promotion efforts. Boards also must be educated and equipped to provide 
effective oversight of management on behalf of the community. A possible 
contribution to this goal might be to establish a system for subscriber 
election of board members.

Another requirement would be to empower community advisory boards to perform 
their designated function. They would have routine access to active program 
proposals, ongoing production schedules and alternative program sources. They 
also would be engaged in active outreach to the community to solicit 
evaluations and assess needs. All of this would be guided by a program policy 
developed by the BOD. And, of course, all of this would be subject to final 
approval by professional management and staff. Finally, the PBT would provide 
financial incentives for local program development.

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY
The proposed PBT would be accountable to both the legislative and executive 
branches of the federal government. The General Accounting Office would conduct 
a biennial financial audit to ensure fiscal responsibility. Every 10 years 
there would be an investigation, hearings and a report with suggested legislative 
changes prior to renewal of the mandate. Both a Presidential Commission and 
Congress would be involved in the process.

FORCES FOR CHANGE 
Advocates for U.S. public broadcasting have long recognized that its financial 
dependence has compromised its editorial independence. Despite congressional 
sponsors, past proposals to establish a public broadcasting trust have been 
defeated by a combination of forces: a powerful National 
Association of Broadcasters, timid politicians not willing to confront 
commercial broadcasters or risk independent voices in the public arena, 
a divided public broadcasting community, and the narrow base of reform movements. 

There are several forces for change these days which give hope that such now 
could be accomplished. In 1998, House Telecommunications Subcommittee leaders 
Billy Tauzin and Edward Markey designed a bill (later withdrawn) to create a 
permanent PBS trust fund, abolish the CPB and phase out commercial underwriting 
messages. The Gore Commission on the social responsibilities of digital 
broadcasters strongly recommends that Congress create a trust fund for public 
television and eliminate "enhanced underwriting" by corporations. A December 1998 
poll by Lake, Snell, Perry & Associates found an overwhelming 79 percent of the 
American public favoring a proposal to require commercial broadcasters to pay 
5 percent of their revenues into a fund to support public broadcasting programming. 

LOOKING FORWARD 
Citizens for Independent Public Broadcasting (CIPB) is dedicated to creating a 
national coalition to build grassroots support for this proposal. At the same 
time, CIPB local chapters are working to democratize the governance and programming 
of their community's public broadcasting station(s). CIPB acts as a 
clearinghouse on the activities and accomplishments of these local chapters and 
on programs available for airing both nationally and locally. 
 

CIPB--Citizens for Independent Public Broadcasting 
Manor Oak Two / Suite 441 / 1910 Cochran Road 
Pittsburgh, PA 15220
Tel:  (412) 563-4150
Fax (412) 563-4960
cipb@cais.com